首页 > 最新文献

Psychological review最新文献

英文 中文
A flexible threshold theory of change perception in self, others, and the world. 关于自我、他人和世界变化感知的灵活阈值理论。
IF 5.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY Pub Date : 2024-09-19 DOI: 10.1037/rev0000490
Ed O'Brien

I propose a flexible threshold theory of change perception in self and social judgment. Traditionally, change perception is viewed as a basic cognitive process entailing the act of discriminating informational differences. This article takes a more dynamic view of change perception, highlighting people's motivations in interpreting those differences. Specifically, I propose people's change perceptions depend not only on the salience and quality of the evidence for change but they also depend on the adaptation implications of the change, as people are sensitive to whether their prompted response would be worth it. Variables that exacerbate perceived adaptation implications should thus lead people to contract their change perception thresholds (people should become less open to concluding things have changed and so less likely to act), while variables that alleviate perceived adaptation implications should thus lead people to expand their change perception thresholds (people should become more open to concluding things have changed and so more likely to act), all else equal in the evidence. Moreover, these effects should emerge for perceiving declines and improvements alike so long as change bears on adaptation implications. I review support for these proposals and use the theory to generate novel predictions, contributions, and applications. The theory can explain anew why people respond (or fail to respond) to changing climates and economies, worsening personal health, growing social progress, and many other self and social phenomena. Change perception is more than an act of discriminating differences-it also entails people's threshold judgments of whether and how these differences matter. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

我提出了一种关于自我和社会判断中变化感知的灵活阈值理论。传统上,变化感知被视为一种基本的认知过程,包含对信息差异的辨别行为。本文从更动态的角度来看待变化感知,强调人们在解释这些差异时的动机。具体来说,我认为人们的变化感知不仅取决于变化证据的显著性和质量,而且还取决于变化的适应影响,因为人们对自己的提示反应是否值得很敏感。因此,在其他证据相同的情况下,加剧所感知的适应影响的变量应导致人们收缩其变化感知阈值(人们应更不愿意得出事情已经发生变化的结论,因此更不可能采取行动),而减轻所感知的适应影响的变量应导致人们扩大其变化感知阈值(人们应更愿意得出事情已经发生变化的结论,因此更可能采取行动)。此外,只要变化对适应有影响,这些效应就会出现在对下降和改善的感知上。我回顾了对这些建议的支持,并利用该理论提出了新的预测、贡献和应用。该理论可以重新解释为什么人们会对不断变化的气候和经济、不断恶化的个人健康、不断增长的社会进步以及许多其他自我和社会现象做出反应(或不做出反应)。变化感知不仅仅是一种辨别差异的行为--它还包括人们对这些差异是否重要以及如何重要的阈值判断。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, 版权所有)。
{"title":"A flexible threshold theory of change perception in self, others, and the world.","authors":"Ed O'Brien","doi":"10.1037/rev0000490","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000490","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>I propose a flexible threshold theory of change perception in self and social judgment. Traditionally, change perception is viewed as a basic cognitive process entailing the act of discriminating informational differences. This article takes a more dynamic view of change perception, highlighting people's motivations in interpreting those differences. Specifically, I propose people's change perceptions depend not only on the salience and quality of the evidence for change but they also depend on the adaptation implications of the change, as people are sensitive to whether their prompted response would be worth it. Variables that exacerbate perceived adaptation implications should thus lead people to contract their change perception thresholds (people should become less open to concluding things have changed and so less likely to act), while variables that alleviate perceived adaptation implications should thus lead people to expand their change perception thresholds (people should become more open to concluding things have changed and so more likely to act), all else equal in the evidence. Moreover, these effects should emerge for perceiving declines and improvements alike so long as change bears on adaptation implications. I review support for these proposals and use the theory to generate novel predictions, contributions, and applications. The theory can explain anew why people respond (or fail to respond) to changing climates and economies, worsening personal health, growing social progress, and many other self and social phenomena. Change perception is more than an act of discriminating differences-it also entails people's threshold judgments of whether and how these differences matter. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":21016,"journal":{"name":"Psychological review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.1,"publicationDate":"2024-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142294104","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Networks of beliefs: An integrative theory of individual- and social-level belief dynamics. 信仰网络:个人和社会层面信念动态的综合理论。
IF 5.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY Pub Date : 2024-09-19 DOI: 10.1037/rev0000494
Jonas Dalege, Mirta Galesic, Henrik Olsson

We present a theory of belief dynamics that explains the interplay between internal beliefs in people's minds and beliefs of others in their external social environments. The networks of belief theory goes beyond existing theories of belief dynamics in three ways. First, it provides an explicit connection between belief networks in individual minds and belief dynamics on social networks. The connection, absent from most previous theories, is established through people's social beliefs or perceived beliefs of others. Second, the theory recognizes that the correspondence between social beliefs and others' actual beliefs can be imperfect, because social beliefs are affected by personal beliefs as well as by the actual beliefs of others. Past theories of belief dynamics on social networks do not distinguish between perceived and actual beliefs of others. Third, the theory explains diverse belief dynamics phenomena parsimoniously through the differences in attention and the resulting felt dissonances in personal, social, and external parts of belief networks. We implement our theoretical assumptions in a computational model within a statistical physics framework and derive model predictions. We find support for our theoretical assumptions and model predictions in two large survey studies (N₁ = 973, N₂ = 669). We then derive insights about diverse phenomena related to belief dynamics, including group consensus and polarization, group radicalization, minority influence, and different empirically observed belief distributions. We discuss how the theory goes beyond different existing models of belief dynamics and outline promising directions for future research. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

我们提出了一种信念动态理论,用以解释人们头脑中的内部信念与外部社会环境中他人信念之间的相互作用。信念网络理论在三个方面超越了现有的信念动态理论。首先,它在个人头脑中的信念网络与社会网络中的信念动态之间建立了明确的联系。这种联系是通过人们的社会信念或感知到的他人信念建立起来的,而以往的大多数理论都没有这种联系。其次,该理论承认社会信念与他人实际信念之间的对应关系可能并不完美,因为社会信念既受个人信念的影响,也受他人实际信念的影响。以往的社交网络信念动态理论没有区分他人的感知信念和实际信念。第三,该理论通过注意力的差异以及由此产生的个人、社会和外部信念网络部分的感觉失调来解释各种信念动态现象。我们在统计物理学框架内的计算模型中实现了我们的理论假设,并得出了模型预测结果。我们在两项大型调查研究(N₁ = 973,N₂ = 669)中发现了对我们的理论假设和模型预测的支持。然后,我们对与信仰动态相关的各种现象进行了深入分析,包括群体共识和极化、群体激进化、少数群体影响以及不同的经验观察到的信仰分布。我们讨论了该理论如何超越现有的不同信念动态模型,并概述了未来研究的前景方向。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, 版权所有)。
{"title":"Networks of beliefs: An integrative theory of individual- and social-level belief dynamics.","authors":"Jonas Dalege, Mirta Galesic, Henrik Olsson","doi":"10.1037/rev0000494","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000494","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We present a theory of belief dynamics that explains the interplay between internal beliefs in people's minds and beliefs of others in their external social environments. The networks of belief theory goes beyond existing theories of belief dynamics in three ways. First, it provides an explicit connection between belief networks in individual minds and belief dynamics on social networks. The connection, absent from most previous theories, is established through people's social beliefs or perceived beliefs of others. Second, the theory recognizes that the correspondence between social beliefs and others' actual beliefs can be imperfect, because social beliefs are affected by personal beliefs as well as by the actual beliefs of others. Past theories of belief dynamics on social networks do not distinguish between perceived and actual beliefs of others. Third, the theory explains diverse belief dynamics phenomena parsimoniously through the differences in attention and the resulting felt dissonances in personal, social, and external parts of belief networks. We implement our theoretical assumptions in a computational model within a statistical physics framework and derive model predictions. We find support for our theoretical assumptions and model predictions in two large survey studies (<i>N</i>₁ = 973, <i>N</i>₂ = 669). We then derive insights about diverse phenomena related to belief dynamics, including group consensus and polarization, group radicalization, minority influence, and different empirically observed belief distributions. We discuss how the theory goes beyond different existing models of belief dynamics and outline promising directions for future research. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":21016,"journal":{"name":"Psychological review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.1,"publicationDate":"2024-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142294115","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Decisions among shifting choice alternatives reveal option-general representations of evidence. 在不断变化的备选方案中做出决定,揭示了对证据的一般表述。
IF 5.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY Pub Date : 2024-09-19 DOI: 10.1037/rev0000500
Peter D Kvam, Konstantina Sokratous, Anderson K Fitch

Dynamic models of choice typically describe the decision-making process in terms of the degree or balance of support for available response options. However, these alternative-specific representations of support are liable to fail when the available options change during the course of a decision. We suggest that people may use alternative-general representations, where stimulus feature information-rather than option-specific support-is accumulated over time and mapped onto support for available options as they appear. We tested alternative-specific and alternative-general models of choice in two perceptual experiments where the available options could change during a trial. In the first study, we showed that changing the choice options partway through a trial resulted in no substantial difference in performance relative to a condition where the final options were always onscreen. This was supported by a quantitative model comparison that strongly favored an alternative-general (geometric) model over two alternative-specific models (diffusion and racing accumulator models). In the second study, the stimulus primed specific unavailable responses to test whether irrelevant support for unavailable options was integrated into the decision process. This study elicited a pattern of accuracy that could not have occurred unless participants accumulated support for options that were not yet available. Together, these experiments and modeling results indicate that the majority of participants rely on alternative-general representations of evidence during dynamic decisions among options that can change over time. Future work on decision behavior and its neural antecedents should explore the predictions of these alternative-general theories of choice. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

选择的动态模型通常是根据对现有反应选项的支持程度或平衡来描述决策过程的。然而,当可用选项在决策过程中发生变化时,这些针对特定选项的支持表征就容易失效。我们认为,人们可能会使用替代性一般表征,在这种表征中,刺激特征信息--而不是特定选项的支持--会随着时间的推移而不断积累,并映射到出现的可用选项的支持上。我们在两个知觉实验中测试了选择的替代-特定模型和替代-一般模型。在第一项研究中,我们发现,与最终选项始终出现在屏幕上的情况相比,在试验的中途改变选择选项并不会导致成绩的实质性差异。这一点得到了定量模型比较的支持,该比较结果表明,相对于两种特定模型(扩散模型和赛车累积模型),我们更倾向于使用另一种通用模型(几何模型)。在第二项研究中,刺激物引出了特定的不可用反应,以测试不可用选项的无关支持是否被整合到决策过程中。这项研究得出了一种准确性模式,除非参与者为尚未可用的选项积累支持,否则这种模式是不可能出现的。这些实验和建模结果共同表明,大多数参与者在对可能随时间变化的选项进行动态决策时,依赖于证据的替代性一般表征。未来有关决策行为及其神经前因的研究工作应探索这些替代性一般选择理论的预测。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, 版权所有)。
{"title":"Decisions among shifting choice alternatives reveal option-general representations of evidence.","authors":"Peter D Kvam, Konstantina Sokratous, Anderson K Fitch","doi":"10.1037/rev0000500","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000500","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Dynamic models of choice typically describe the decision-making process in terms of the degree or balance of support for available response options. However, these alternative-specific representations of support are liable to fail when the available options change during the course of a decision. We suggest that people may use alternative-general representations, where stimulus feature information-rather than option-specific support-is accumulated over time and mapped onto support for available options as they appear. We tested alternative-specific and alternative-general models of choice in two perceptual experiments where the available options could change during a trial. In the first study, we showed that changing the choice options partway through a trial resulted in no substantial difference in performance relative to a condition where the final options were always onscreen. This was supported by a quantitative model comparison that strongly favored an alternative-general (geometric) model over two alternative-specific models (diffusion and racing accumulator models). In the second study, the stimulus primed specific unavailable responses to test whether irrelevant support for unavailable options was integrated into the decision process. This study elicited a pattern of accuracy that could not have occurred unless participants accumulated support for options that were not yet available. Together, these experiments and modeling results indicate that the majority of participants rely on alternative-general representations of evidence during dynamic decisions among options that can change over time. Future work on decision behavior and its neural antecedents should explore the predictions of these alternative-general theories of choice. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":21016,"journal":{"name":"Psychological review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.1,"publicationDate":"2024-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142294108","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Social exploration: How and why people seek new connections. 社会探索:人们如何以及为何寻求新的联系。
IF 5.4 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY Pub Date : 2024-09-12 DOI: 10.1037/rev0000499
Shelly Tsang,Kyle Barrentine,Sareena Chadha,Shigehiro Oishi,Adrienne Wood
Just as animals forage for food, humans forage for social connections. People often face a decision between exploring new relationships versus deepening existing ones. This trade-off, known in optimal foraging theory as the exploration-exploitation trade-off, is featured prominently in other disciplines such as animal foraging, learning, and organizational behavior. Many of the framework's principles can be applied to humans' choices about their social resources, which we call social exploration/exploitation. Using known principles in the domain of social exploration/exploitation can help social psychologists better understand how and why people choose their relationships, which ultimately affect their health and well-being. In this article, we discuss the costs and benefits of social exploration and social exploitation. We then synthesize known person- and situation-level predictors of social decision making, reframing them in the language of the explore-exploit trade-off. We propose that people explore more when they find it more rewarding and less costly, and when the environment has many opportunities to do so. We conclude by discussing hypotheses generated by applying optimal foraging theory to social decision making. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
就像动物觅食一样,人类也在寻找社会关系。人们经常要在探索新关系与深化现有关系之间做出抉择。这种权衡在最优觅食理论中被称为探索-开发权衡,在动物觅食、学习和组织行为学等其他学科中也有突出表现。该框架的许多原理都可应用于人类对其社会资源的选择,我们称之为社会探索/开发。在社会探索/开发领域使用已知的原则可以帮助社会心理学家更好地理解人们如何以及为什么选择他们的人际关系,这些关系最终会影响他们的健康和幸福。在本文中,我们将讨论社会探索和社会利用的成本和收益。然后,我们综合了已知的个人和情境层面的社会决策预测因素,并用探索-剥削权衡的语言对其进行了重构。我们提出,当人们发现探索的回报更高、成本更低,而且环境中有很多探索机会时,他们就会进行更多的探索。最后,我们讨论了将最优觅食理论应用于社会决策所产生的假设。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, 版权所有)。
{"title":"Social exploration: How and why people seek new connections.","authors":"Shelly Tsang,Kyle Barrentine,Sareena Chadha,Shigehiro Oishi,Adrienne Wood","doi":"10.1037/rev0000499","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000499","url":null,"abstract":"Just as animals forage for food, humans forage for social connections. People often face a decision between exploring new relationships versus deepening existing ones. This trade-off, known in optimal foraging theory as the exploration-exploitation trade-off, is featured prominently in other disciplines such as animal foraging, learning, and organizational behavior. Many of the framework's principles can be applied to humans' choices about their social resources, which we call social exploration/exploitation. Using known principles in the domain of social exploration/exploitation can help social psychologists better understand how and why people choose their relationships, which ultimately affect their health and well-being. In this article, we discuss the costs and benefits of social exploration and social exploitation. We then synthesize known person- and situation-level predictors of social decision making, reframing them in the language of the explore-exploit trade-off. We propose that people explore more when they find it more rewarding and less costly, and when the environment has many opportunities to do so. We conclude by discussing hypotheses generated by applying optimal foraging theory to social decision making. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).","PeriodicalId":21016,"journal":{"name":"Psychological review","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.4,"publicationDate":"2024-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142174456","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Understanding self-control as a problem of regulatory scope. 将自我控制理解为监管范围的问题。
IF 5.4 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY Pub Date : 2024-09-12 DOI: 10.1037/rev0000501
Kentaro Fujita,Yaacov Trope,Nira Liberman
Although the focus of research for decades, there is a surprising lack of consensus on what is (and what is not) self-control. We review some of the most prominent theoretical models of self-control, including those that highlight conflicts between smaller-sooner versus larger-later rewards, "hot" emotions versus "cool" cognitions, and efficient automatic versus resource-intensive controlled processes. After discussing some of their shortcomings, we propose an alternative approach based on tenets of construal level theory (Trope et al., 2021) that integrates these disparate models while also providing novel insights. Specifically, we model self-control as a problem of regulatory scope-the range of considerations one accounts for in any decision or behavior. Self-control conflicts occur when the pursuit of specific local opportunities threatens the ability to address motivational priorities that span a broader array of time, places, individuals, and possibilities. Whereas a more contractive consideration of relevant concerns may prompt indulgence in temptation, a more expansive consideration of concerns should not only help people identify the self-control conflict but also successfully resolve it. We review empirical evidence that supports this new framework and discuss implications and new directions. This regulatory framework not only clarifies what is and what is not self-control but also provides new insights that can be leveraged to enhance self-control in all its various forms. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
尽管几十年来自我控制一直是研究的重点,但人们对什么是(什么不是)自我控制竟然缺乏共识。我们回顾了一些最著名的自我控制理论模型,包括那些强调 "越早越小 "奖励与 "越晚越大 "奖励之间的冲突、"火热 "情绪与 "冷静 "认知之间的冲突,以及高效的自动过程与资源密集型控制过程之间的冲突。在讨论了这些模型的一些缺点之后,我们提出了一种基于构解水平理论(Trope 等人,2021 年)的替代方法,该方法整合了这些不同的模型,同时还提供了新的见解。具体来说,我们将自我控制建模为一个调节范围问题--在任何决策或行为中考虑的范围。当追求特定的局部机会威胁到处理跨越更广泛的时间、地点、个人和可能性的动机优先事项的能力时,就会发生自我控制冲突。如果对相关问题的考虑更具收缩性,可能会促使人们沉溺于诱惑,而如果对相关问题的考虑更具扩展性,则不仅能帮助人们识别自我控制冲突,还能成功解决冲突。我们回顾了支持这一新框架的经验证据,并讨论了其影响和新方向。这个调节框架不仅澄清了什么是自我控制,什么不是自我控制,而且还提供了新的见解,可用于加强各种形式的自我控制。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA,保留所有权利)。
{"title":"Understanding self-control as a problem of regulatory scope.","authors":"Kentaro Fujita,Yaacov Trope,Nira Liberman","doi":"10.1037/rev0000501","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000501","url":null,"abstract":"Although the focus of research for decades, there is a surprising lack of consensus on what is (and what is not) self-control. We review some of the most prominent theoretical models of self-control, including those that highlight conflicts between smaller-sooner versus larger-later rewards, \"hot\" emotions versus \"cool\" cognitions, and efficient automatic versus resource-intensive controlled processes. After discussing some of their shortcomings, we propose an alternative approach based on tenets of construal level theory (Trope et al., 2021) that integrates these disparate models while also providing novel insights. Specifically, we model self-control as a problem of regulatory scope-the range of considerations one accounts for in any decision or behavior. Self-control conflicts occur when the pursuit of specific local opportunities threatens the ability to address motivational priorities that span a broader array of time, places, individuals, and possibilities. Whereas a more contractive consideration of relevant concerns may prompt indulgence in temptation, a more expansive consideration of concerns should not only help people identify the self-control conflict but also successfully resolve it. We review empirical evidence that supports this new framework and discuss implications and new directions. This regulatory framework not only clarifies what is and what is not self-control but also provides new insights that can be leveraged to enhance self-control in all its various forms. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).","PeriodicalId":21016,"journal":{"name":"Psychological review","volume":"382 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.4,"publicationDate":"2024-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142174457","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
The (absence of the) presence-absence distinction in motivation science. 动机科学中存在与不存在的区别(不存在)。
IF 5.4 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY Pub Date : 2024-09-12 DOI: 10.1037/rev0000508
Andrew J Elliot,E Tory Higgins,Emily Nakkawita
A focal stimulus (object, end state, outcome, event, experience, characteristic, possibility, etc.) may represent a presence, an occurrence, or something, or it may represent an absence, a nonoccurrence, or nothing. This presence-absence distinction has received extensive and explicit attention in cognitive psychology (it is the central figure), but it has received minimal and primarily implicit attention in motivation science (it is the ground, not the figure). Herein, we explicitly place the presence-absence distinction in the role of figure in a motivational account of behavior, and we do so in the context of the foundational approach-avoidance motivation distinction. We review pertinent literature in cognitive psychology and motivation science, and we provide a model integrating the approach-avoidance and the presence-absence distinctions, along with numerous examples, illustrations, and observations. We believe that attending to the presence-absence distinction in motivation science holds great promise for theory, research, and application, and we encourage researchers to attend to this distinction moving forward. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
焦点刺激(对象、最终状态、结果、事件、经验、特征、可能性等)可能代表存在、发生或某种事物,也可能代表不存在、不发生或什么都没有。这种存在与不存在的区别在认知心理学中得到了广泛而明确的关注(它是中心人物),但在动机科学中却很少得到关注,而且主要是隐含的关注(它是基础,而不是人物)。在此,我们明确地将 "存在-不存在 "的区别置于行为动机解释中的 "形象 "角色,并将其置于接近-回避动机区别的基础背景下。我们回顾了认知心理学和动机科学中的相关文献,并提供了一个将接近-回避和存在-缺失的区别融为一体的模型,以及大量的实例、说明和观察结果。我们相信,在动机科学中关注 "存在-缺失 "的区别将为理论、研究和应用带来巨大的前景,我们鼓励研究人员继续关注这一区别。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved)。
{"title":"The (absence of the) presence-absence distinction in motivation science.","authors":"Andrew J Elliot,E Tory Higgins,Emily Nakkawita","doi":"10.1037/rev0000508","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000508","url":null,"abstract":"A focal stimulus (object, end state, outcome, event, experience, characteristic, possibility, etc.) may represent a presence, an occurrence, or something, or it may represent an absence, a nonoccurrence, or nothing. This presence-absence distinction has received extensive and explicit attention in cognitive psychology (it is the central figure), but it has received minimal and primarily implicit attention in motivation science (it is the ground, not the figure). Herein, we explicitly place the presence-absence distinction in the role of figure in a motivational account of behavior, and we do so in the context of the foundational approach-avoidance motivation distinction. We review pertinent literature in cognitive psychology and motivation science, and we provide a model integrating the approach-avoidance and the presence-absence distinctions, along with numerous examples, illustrations, and observations. We believe that attending to the presence-absence distinction in motivation science holds great promise for theory, research, and application, and we encourage researchers to attend to this distinction moving forward. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).","PeriodicalId":21016,"journal":{"name":"Psychological review","volume":"52 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.4,"publicationDate":"2024-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142174458","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Dynamic retrieval of events and associations from memory: An integrated account of item and associative recognition. 从记忆中动态检索事件和联想:项目识别和联想识别的综合说明。
IF 5.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY Pub Date : 2024-07-25 DOI: 10.1037/rev0000486
Gregory E Cox

Memory theories distinguish between item and associative information, which are engaged by different tasks: item recognition uses item information to decide whether an event occurred in a particular context; associative recognition uses associative information to decide whether two events occurred together. Associative recognition is slower and less accurate than item recognition, suggesting that item and associative information may be represented in different forms and retrieved using different processes. Instead, I show how a dynamic model (Cox & Criss, 2020; Cox & Shiffrin, 2017) accounts for accuracy and response time distributions in both item and associative recognition with the same set of representations and processes. Item and associative information are both represented as vectors of features. Item and associative recognition both depend on comparing traces in memory with probes of memory in which item and associative features gradually accumulate. Associative features are slower to accumulate, but largely because they emerge from conjunctions of already-accumulated item features. I apply the model to data from 453 participants, each of whom performed an item and performed associative recognition following identical study conditions (Cox et al., 2018). Comparisons among restricted versions of the model show that its account of associative feature formation, coupled with limits on the rate at which features accumulate from multiple items, explains how and why the dynamics of associative recognition differ from those of item recognition even while both tasks rely on the same underlying representations. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

记忆理论将项目信息和联想信息区分开来,这两种信息被不同的任务所使用:项目识别使用项目信息来判断一个事件是否在特定环境中发生;联想识别使用联想信息来判断两个事件是否一起发生。与项目识别相比,联想识别的速度更慢,准确性也更低,这表明项目信息和联想信息可能以不同的形式表示,并使用不同的过程进行检索。相反,我展示了一个动态模型(Cox & Criss, 2020; Cox & Shiffrin, 2017)是如何用同一套表征和过程来解释项目识别和联想识别的准确率和反应时间分布的。项目信息和联想信息都表示为特征向量。项目识别和联想识别都依赖于将记忆中的痕迹与记忆探针进行比较,在记忆探针中,项目特征和联想特征会逐渐积累。联想特征的积累速度较慢,但这主要是因为它们是由已经积累的项目特征组合而成的。我将该模型应用于来自 453 名参与者的数据,他们每人都在相同的研究条件下进行了项目识别和联想识别(Cox 等人,2018 年)。该模型的限制性版本之间的比较表明,该模型对联想特征形成的解释,加上对多个项目特征积累速度的限制,解释了联想识别的动态如何以及为什么与项目识别的动态不同,即使这两种任务都依赖于相同的底层表征。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, 版权所有)。
{"title":"Dynamic retrieval of events and associations from memory: An integrated account of item and associative recognition.","authors":"Gregory E Cox","doi":"10.1037/rev0000486","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000486","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Memory theories distinguish between item and associative information, which are engaged by different tasks: item recognition uses item information to decide whether an event occurred in a particular context; associative recognition uses associative information to decide whether two events occurred together. Associative recognition is slower and less accurate than item recognition, suggesting that item and associative information may be represented in different forms and retrieved using different processes. Instead, I show how a dynamic model (Cox & Criss, 2020; Cox & Shiffrin, 2017) accounts for accuracy and response time distributions in both item and associative recognition with the same set of representations and processes. Item and associative information are both represented as vectors of features. Item and associative recognition both depend on comparing traces in memory with probes of memory in which item and associative features gradually accumulate. Associative features are slower to accumulate, but largely because they emerge from conjunctions of already-accumulated item features. I apply the model to data from 453 participants, each of whom performed an item and performed associative recognition following identical study conditions (Cox et al., 2018). Comparisons among restricted versions of the model show that its account of associative feature formation, coupled with limits on the rate at which features accumulate from multiple items, explains how and why the dynamics of associative recognition differ from those of item recognition even while both tasks rely on the same underlying representations. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":21016,"journal":{"name":"Psychological review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.1,"publicationDate":"2024-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141760645","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Open-mindedness: An integrative review of interventions. 心胸开阔:干预措施综合评述。
IF 5.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY Pub Date : 2024-07-25 DOI: 10.1037/rev0000491
Stephanie Y Dolbier, Macrina C Dieffenbach, Matthew D Lieberman

Partisan animosity has been growing in the United States and around the world over the past few decades, fueling efforts by researchers and practitioners to help heal the divide. Many studies have been conducted to test interventions that aim to promote open-mindedness; however, these studies have been conducted in disparate literatures that do not always use the same terminology. In this review, we integrate research on open-mindedness in order to facilitate cross-talk and collaboration between disciplines. We review various concepts related to open-mindedness and then offer a conceptual model to help guide the further development of interventions and research to understand open-mindedness. We propose that open-mindedness is multifaceted and dynamic, such that interventions should focus on targeting multiple psychological pathways in order to maximize and sustain their effects. Specifically, we propose that interventions that target cognitive and/or motivational pathways can induce open-mindedness initially. Then, training in emotion regulation and/or social skills can help to sustain and build on open-mindedness once individuals enter into a situation where their beliefs are challenged. We conclude with a discussion of potential future directions for research on open-mindedness interventions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

在过去几十年里,美国和世界各地的党派敌意与日俱增,促使研究人员和从业人员努力帮助弥合分歧。许多研究都是为了测试旨在促进思想开放的干预措施;然而,这些研究都是在不同的文献中进行的,并不总是使用相同的术语。在本综述中,我们整合了有关开放心态的研究,以促进学科间的交流与合作。我们回顾了与心胸开阔相关的各种概念,然后提供了一个概念模型,以帮助指导干预措施和研究的进一步发展,从而理解心胸开阔。我们提出,开放心态是多方面的、动态的,因此干预措施应侧重于针对多种心理途径,以最大限度地发挥并维持其效果。具体来说,我们建议针对认知和/或动机途径的干预措施可以在初期诱导心胸开阔。然后,一旦个体的信念受到挑战,情绪调节和/或社交技巧方面的培训可以帮助维持和巩固开放心态。最后,我们讨论了开放心态干预研究的潜在未来方向。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved)。
{"title":"Open-mindedness: An integrative review of interventions.","authors":"Stephanie Y Dolbier, Macrina C Dieffenbach, Matthew D Lieberman","doi":"10.1037/rev0000491","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000491","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Partisan animosity has been growing in the United States and around the world over the past few decades, fueling efforts by researchers and practitioners to help heal the divide. Many studies have been conducted to test interventions that aim to promote open-mindedness; however, these studies have been conducted in disparate literatures that do not always use the same terminology. In this review, we integrate research on open-mindedness in order to facilitate cross-talk and collaboration between disciplines. We review various concepts related to open-mindedness and then offer a conceptual model to help guide the further development of interventions and research to understand open-mindedness. We propose that open-mindedness is multifaceted and dynamic, such that interventions should focus on targeting multiple psychological pathways in order to maximize and sustain their effects. Specifically, we propose that interventions that target cognitive and/or motivational pathways can induce open-mindedness initially. Then, training in emotion regulation and/or social skills can help to sustain and build on open-mindedness once individuals enter into a situation where their beliefs are challenged. We conclude with a discussion of potential future directions for research on open-mindedness interventions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":21016,"journal":{"name":"Psychological review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.1,"publicationDate":"2024-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141760647","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
An integrated model of semantics and control. 语义和控制的综合模型。
IF 5.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY Pub Date : 2024-07-25 DOI: 10.1037/rev0000485
Tyler Giallanza, Declan Campbell, Jonathan D Cohen, Timothy T Rogers

Understanding the mechanisms enabling the learning and flexible use of knowledge in context-appropriate ways has been a major focus of research in the study of both semantic cognition and cognitive control. We present a unified model of semantics and control that addresses these questions from both perspectives. The model provides a coherent view of how semantic knowledge, and the ability to flexibly access and deploy that knowledge to meet current task demands, arises from end-to-end learning of the statistics of the environment. We show that the model addresses unresolved issues from both literatures, including how control operates over features that covary with one another and how control representations themselves are structured and emerge through learning, through a series of behavioral experiments and simulations. We conclude by discussing the implications of our approach to other fundamental questions in cognitive science, machine learning, and artificial intelligence. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

在语义认知和认知控制的研究中,了解以适合语境的方式学习和灵活运用知识的机制一直是研究的重点。我们提出了一个统一的语义和控制模型,从这两个角度来解决这些问题。该模型提供了一个连贯的视角,说明语义知识以及灵活获取和部署该知识以满足当前任务需求的能力,是如何从端到端学习环境的统计数据中产生的。我们通过一系列行为实验和模拟,展示了该模型解决了这两方面文献中尚未解决的问题,包括控制是如何对彼此共生的特征进行操作的,以及控制表征本身是如何通过学习而结构化和出现的。最后,我们将讨论我们的方法对认知科学、机器学习和人工智能领域其他基本问题的影响。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved)。
{"title":"An integrated model of semantics and control.","authors":"Tyler Giallanza, Declan Campbell, Jonathan D Cohen, Timothy T Rogers","doi":"10.1037/rev0000485","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000485","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Understanding the mechanisms enabling the learning and flexible use of knowledge in context-appropriate ways has been a major focus of research in the study of both semantic cognition and cognitive control. We present a unified model of semantics and control that addresses these questions from both perspectives. The model provides a coherent view of how semantic knowledge, and the ability to flexibly access and deploy that knowledge to meet current task demands, arises from end-to-end learning of the statistics of the environment. We show that the model addresses unresolved issues from both literatures, including how control operates over features that covary with one another and how control representations themselves are structured and emerge through learning, through a series of behavioral experiments and simulations. We conclude by discussing the implications of our approach to other fundamental questions in cognitive science, machine learning, and artificial intelligence. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":21016,"journal":{"name":"Psychological review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.1,"publicationDate":"2024-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141760644","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Memory out of context: Spacing effects and decontextualization in a computational model of the medial temporal lobe. 脱离语境的记忆:内侧颞叶计算模型中的间距效应和去语境化。
IF 5.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY Pub Date : 2024-07-25 DOI: 10.1037/rev0000488
James Antony, Xiaonan L Liu, Yicong Zheng, Charan Ranganath, Randall C O'Reilly

Some neural representations gradually change across multiple timescales. Here we argue that modeling this "drift" could help explain the spacing effect (the long-term benefit of distributed learning), whereby differences between stored and current temporal context activity patterns produce greater error-driven learning. We trained a neurobiologically realistic model of the entorhinal cortex and hippocampus to learn paired associates alongside temporal context vectors that drifted between learning episodes and/or before final retention intervals. In line with spacing effects, greater drift led to better model recall after longer retention intervals. Dissecting model mechanisms revealed that greater drift increased error-driven learning, strengthened weights in slower drifting temporal context neurons (temporal abstraction), and improved direct cue-target associations (decontextualization). Intriguingly, these results suggest that decontextualization-generally ascribed only to the neocortex-can occur within the hippocampus itself. Altogether, our findings provide a mechanistic formalization for established learning concepts such as spacing effects and errors during learning. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

有些神经表征会在多个时间尺度上逐渐发生变化。在这里,我们认为对这种 "漂移 "进行建模有助于解释间距效应(分布式学习的长期益处),即存储的和当前的时间背景活动模式之间的差异会产生更大的错误驱动学习。我们训练了一个符合神经生物学现实的内侧皮层和海马模型,让它与在学习发作之间和/或最终保留间隔之前漂移的时间上下文向量一起学习配对联想。与间距效应一致的是,漂移越大,保留间隔越长,模型的回忆效果越好。对模型机制的剖析显示,更大的漂移增加了错误驱动的学习,加强了漂移较慢的时空语境神经元的权重(时空抽象),并改善了线索与目标的直接关联(去语境化)。耐人寻味的是,这些结果表明,通常被认为只发生在新皮层的去语境化现象也可能发生在海马本身。总之,我们的研究结果为学习过程中的间距效应和错误等既定学习概念提供了机制上的形式化。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, 版权所有)。
{"title":"Memory out of context: Spacing effects and decontextualization in a computational model of the medial temporal lobe.","authors":"James Antony, Xiaonan L Liu, Yicong Zheng, Charan Ranganath, Randall C O'Reilly","doi":"10.1037/rev0000488","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000488","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Some neural representations gradually change across multiple timescales. Here we argue that modeling this \"drift\" could help explain the spacing effect (the long-term benefit of distributed learning), whereby differences between stored and current temporal context activity patterns produce greater error-driven learning. We trained a neurobiologically realistic model of the entorhinal cortex and hippocampus to learn paired associates alongside temporal context vectors that drifted between learning episodes and/or before final retention intervals. In line with spacing effects, greater drift led to better model recall after longer retention intervals. Dissecting model mechanisms revealed that greater drift increased error-driven learning, strengthened weights in slower drifting temporal context neurons (temporal abstraction), and improved direct cue-target associations (decontextualization). Intriguingly, these results suggest that decontextualization-generally ascribed only to the neocortex-can occur within the hippocampus itself. Altogether, our findings provide a mechanistic formalization for established learning concepts such as spacing effects and errors during learning. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":21016,"journal":{"name":"Psychological review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.1,"publicationDate":"2024-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141760646","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
期刊
Psychological review
全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1