Experimental psychology最新文献

Visual working memory (VWM), due to its temporary nature, is highly volatile. VWM encoding may be easily disrupted by cues from our visually rich media environment, such as social media logos and notification badges. Yet, to what extent these social media-related cues adversely affect our cognitive processing is not well understood. In three experiments, participants performed a change-detection task with a memory array that contained colored stimuli. Next to the memory array, social media logos with or without notification badges might appear in conjunction with the memory array in critical blocks (Experiment 1) or in critical trials (Experiment 2 and 3). The presence of social media logos with notification badges adversely affected change detection performance in Experiment 1, but not in Experiment 2 or 3. Overall, the findings seem to indicate that the presence of social media logos does not interfere with visual working memory performance.

While the impact of time pressure on decision-making is extensively studied, how individuals regulate their behavior under such conditions is less understood. This study addressed this gap by prompting participants to use cognitive reappraisal, an emotion regulation strategy. Participants were instructed to reinterpret their emotions during the decision-making process and asked to answer within 1,000 ms. Findings revealed that cognitive reappraisal mitigated the effects of time pressure in gain-framed trials by decreasing risk aversion that is usually induced by time pressure. A post hoc moderated mediation analysis indicated that this was attributed to the dual influence of cognitive reappraisal: less emotional intensity toward options and less overall emotional reliance during the cognitive process, both modulating risky preferences. However, this modulation was not observed in loss-framed trials. These results enhance our understanding of cognitive reappraisal's role in moderating the behavioral impact of time pressure and suggest interventions to reduce affect heuristics in decision-making.

Recent work has supported the role of reasoning in third-party moral judgment of harm transgressions. In particular, reasoning may increase the weight of intention in moral judgment, especially following accidental harm, a situation that presumably requires judges to balance considerations about the outcome endured by a victim on the one hand and considerations about an agent's intention to cause harm on the other hand. Three preregistered lab-based studies aimed to test the causal contribution of reasoning to moral judgment of harm transgressions using experimental manipulations borrowed from the reasoning literature: time pressure (Experiment 1), cognitive load (Experiment 2), and priming (Experiment 3). Participants (N = 284) were presented with short fictitious scenarios in which the agent's intention toward a potential victim (harmful or neutral intent) and the action's outcome (victim's injury or no harm) were manipulated. Participants then reported their moral judgment of the agent's behavior (wrongness and deserved punishment) and their empathy toward the victim. We found that time pressure reduced judgment severity toward agents who had the intention to harm, but the reasoning manipulations overall did not impact judgment severity toward agents who harmed accidentally. We discuss why reasoning may sometimes influence how individuals account for intention in third-party moral judgment of harm transgressions.

A key finding within nudging research is the default effect, where individuals are inclined to stay with a default option when faced with a decision, rather than exploring alternatives (e.g., a preselected job opportunity among two alternatives). Similarly, the study of framing effects delves into how the presentation and context of decisions influence choices (e.g., choosing vs. rejecting a job opportunity among two alternatives). Specifically, previous literature examining choosing versus rejecting decision frames in various situations has found that these frames do not invariably complement each other; therefore, individuals' preferences vary based on the task frame. Yet, simultaneous testing of multiple nudges remains relatively unexplored in the literature. In the current study involving 1,072 participants, we examined how framing and default effects can influence decision-making in hypothetical scenarios. The decision scenarios involved two different domains-work and health. We found that framing had a strong effect on decision-making in both work and health domains, whereas default setting contributed only to a limited extent in the work domain and no effect was found in the health domain, mirroring related recent research findings. We argue for a more careful design of nudge interventions when multiple overlapping nudges are used and for a contextual approach to applying behavioral science to citizens.

Online experiments offer several advantages over traditional laboratory experiments. However, for reaction time experiments, precise stimulus presentation and response detection is crucial. The precision of online experiments could be compromised due to increased variance arising from varying hardware configurations among participants, lack of control over experimental conditions, and the absence of an examiner. In this study, we conducted an online experiment using the avatar-Simon task to investigate whether small differences in reaction times could be examined using online experiments conducted with the experimental toolkit PsyToolkit. In the avatar-Simon task, participants respond to the color of vertically presented stimuli in front of avatars by pressing a left or right button. Reactions are faster when the position of the stimulus, defined from the avatar's point of view, matches the position of the response. Compared to the previous laboratory experiment, we observed lower effect sizes and more timeouts but were able to replicate the avatar-Simon effect overall. Based on further distributional and reliability analyses, PsyToolkit appears to be suitable tool to detect behavioral effects in the range of tens of milliseconds. We discuss differences and similarities with the original laboratory study and suggest how to address potential problems associated with online experiments.

How confident a student is about how they answer a question has important education implications. Participants answered 10 mathematics questions and provided their estimates of how likely they got each individual item correct and how many, in total, they answered correctly. They were overconfident in these metacognitive judgments. Some of the participants were asked to justify why their answers were either correct or incorrect prior to making these judgments. This lowered their confidence ratings. They were still overconfident, but less than those in the control group. The instruction also affected the association between the confidence ratings and accuracy. No differences were observed between those asked to justify why their responses were correct versus those asked to justify why their responses were incorrect. Those asked to think about the accuracy of a response had lower confidence. This has important implications for understanding how we construct confidence judgments and within education how student confidence can be affected during assessments.

Using two executive tasks, we explored how body posture influences mind wandering, a universal internally self-generated activity. Specifically, participants were instructed to perform the Sustained Attention Response Task (SART) and the Flanker task under three postural conditions: lying supine, sitting, and standing upright. These tasks reflect the proactive and reactive modes of executive control, respectively. To measure the frequency of mind wandering, we employed the probe-caught technique, presenting prompts at irregular intervals. The results indicate that, compared to standing and sitting positions, lying supine significantly increased mind wandering, while posture had no effect on either measure of executive control. We suggest that changes in posture alter cognitive activity related to self-generated thoughts and external tasks, whereas the relationship between mind wandering and executive control requires further research.

Most cognitive psychological studies assume that participants in lab-based tasks maintain a single goal based on task instructions. However, people can be motivated by other factors, such as curiosity. We examined if people attend to seemingly task-irrelevant information out of curiosity by manipulating stimulus uncertainty in a cueing paradigm. Participants were presented with an abrupt-onset cue followed by a letter target (E or H). Next, a mask either at the target location (low uncertainty) or at all four locations (high uncertainty) was shown. We expected high uncertainty to induce a state of curiosity that in turn influences the processing of the cue. Cueing effects were greater in the high-uncertainty condition compared to the low-uncertainty condition. In Experiment 2, we additionally elicited self-report ratings on curiosity. In sum, target-specific uncertainty leads to greater processing of task-irrelevant peripheral cues across two experiments. We tentatively conclude that uncertainty modulates attention control and further research is necessary to examine if this is indeed due to curiosity induced by uncertainty.

Prior evidence has indicated that the act of producing a word aloud is more effortful than reading a word silently, and this effort is related to the subsequent memory advantage for produced words. In the current study, we further examined the contributions of reading effort to the overall production effect by making silent reading more effortful. To do this, participants studied words that were presented in standard lowercase font format and words that were presented in an aLtErNaTiNg CaSe font format (which should be more effortful to read). Half of the words in each font condition were read aloud, and half were read silently. Participants completed an old/new recognition test. Experiment 1 was conducted online; Experiment 2 was conducted in-lab and recorded reading times at study to confirm that alternating case font slows reading. In both experiments, we found a production effect in recognition that was uninfluenced by font type. We also found that alternating case font selectively increased recollection (but not familiarity) relative to lowercase font. Thus, the additional time to read words in a disfluent font does not appear to interact with memory benefit of producing words aloud.