Cognitive Psychology最新文献

Counting parts and wholes and the mastery of partitive language 计算部分和整体以及对分割语言的掌握

IF 3 2区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY

Cognitive Psychology

Pub Date : 2026-01-29 DOI: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2026.101788

Peggy Li , Susan Carey , Pierina Cheung

Children under age 6 or 7 quantify over objects of a single kind in ways that differ markedly from adults. For example, shown three pieces of a single fork and one whole fork, children say there are four forks, and not one or two forks. Here we explore why children exhibit these phenomena as well as motivating hypotheses of what’s changing over ages 5 through 8. We note that partitive language such as “two pieces of a fork” specifies atoms of quantification and provides a context in which a piece of a fork is not a fork. We hypothesize that while children begin learning partitive language early in the preschool years, they assign it a precursor meaning that lacks adult quantificational force. Five experiments provide evidence that children begin learning partitive terms at age 2, but analyze these terms and phrases with precursor meanings akin to subsective adjectives. Experiments 1–4 establish that knowledge of partitive vocabulary is unrelated to quantificational decisions on a part/whole quantification task at these ages. In contrast, this early knowledge of partitive language selectively predicts success at using the contrast between “half/piece” and “whole” in a non-verbal visual working memory (VWM) task that does not involve quantificational ambiguity. Furthermore, the level of success on the half/whole VWM task is comparable to that on small/big VWM task, where “small/big” are indisputably subsective adjectives. These data are consistent with the precursor meaning hypothesis. Experiment 5 directly tests whether 4-year-old children can make sense of quantificational language like “this piece and this piece make one fork” and finds they cannot. These data suggest that adult analysis of the quantificational force of partitive language is not mastered until after age 4. They motivate further research that investigates whether, beginning at age 5, a semantic/syntactic change from a precursor meaning to adult meaning of partitive language may reflect and contribute to a wider change in conceptual quantificational resources.

6岁或7岁以下的儿童对单一种类物体的量化方式与成人明显不同。例如，给孩子们看单个叉子的三个部分和一个完整的叉子，孩子们会说有四个叉子，而不是一个或两个叉子。在这里，我们探讨了为什么孩子们会表现出这些现象，以及在5到8岁之间发生变化的动机假设。我们注意到，诸如“分叉的两块”这样的分割语言指定了量化原子，并提供了一个分叉的一块不是分叉的上下文。我们假设，当孩子们在学龄前早期开始学习分割语言时，他们会赋予它一种缺乏成人量化力量的前兆意义。五个实验提供了证据，证明儿童在2岁时开始学习分词，但分析这些词和短语时，它们的前驱意义类似于主词形容词。实验1-4证实，在这些年龄段，部分词汇的知识与部分/整体量化任务的量化决策无关。相比之下，这种对分割语言的早期知识选择性地预测了在不涉及定量歧义的非语言视觉工作记忆（VWM）任务中成功使用“半/片”和“整体”之间的对比。此外，半/全VWM任务的成功程度与小/大VWM任务的成功程度相当，其中“小/大”是无可争议的主观形容词。这些数据与前体意义假说一致。实验5直接测试了4岁的孩子是否能理解“这块和这块组成一个叉子”这样的量化语言，结果发现他们不能理解。这些数据表明，成人要到4岁以后才能掌握对分割语言的定量分析能力。他们激发了进一步的研究，以调查是否从5岁开始，分词语言从前体意义到成人意义的语义/句法变化可能反映并促进概念量化资源的更广泛变化。

{"title":"Counting parts and wholes and the mastery of partitive language","authors":"Peggy Li , Susan Carey , Pierina Cheung","doi":"10.1016/j.cogpsych.2026.101788","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.cogpsych.2026.101788","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Children under age 6 or 7 quantify over objects of a single kind in ways that differ markedly from adults. For example, shown three pieces of a single fork and one whole fork, children say there are four forks, and not one or two forks. Here we explore why children exhibit these phenomena as well as motivating hypotheses of what’s changing over ages 5 through 8. We note that partitive language such as “two pieces of a fork” specifies atoms of quantification and provides a context in which a piece of a fork is not a fork. We hypothesize that while children begin learning partitive language early in the preschool years, they assign it a precursor meaning that lacks adult quantificational force. Five experiments provide evidence that children begin learning partitive terms at age 2, but analyze these terms and phrases with precursor meanings akin to subsective adjectives. Experiments 1–4 establish that knowledge of partitive vocabulary is unrelated to quantificational decisions on a part/whole quantification task at these ages. In contrast, this early knowledge of partitive language selectively predicts success at using the contrast between “half/piece” and “whole” in a non-verbal visual working memory (VWM) task that <em>does not involve quantificational ambiguity</em>. Furthermore, the level of success on the half/whole VWM task is comparable to that on small/big VWM task, where “small/big” are indisputably subsective adjectives. These data are consistent with the precursor meaning hypothesis. Experiment 5 directly tests whether 4-year-old children can make sense of quantificational language like “this piece and this piece make one fork” and finds they cannot. These data suggest that adult analysis of the quantificational force of partitive language is not mastered until after age 4. They motivate further research that investigates whether, beginning at age 5, a semantic/syntactic change from a precursor meaning to adult meaning of partitive language may reflect and contribute to a wider change in conceptual quantificational resources.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":50669,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Psychology","volume":"163 ","pages":"Article 101788"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2026-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"146057540","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"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

Compressed representations and attentional competition in numeric integration for average estimations 平均估计数值积分中的压缩表示和注意竞争

IF 3 2区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY

Cognitive Psychology

Pub Date : 2025-12-25 DOI: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2025.101780

Yongming Sun , Alice Mason , Sebastian Olschewski

The ability to gauge the average of a number stream is a fundamental aspect of numeric cognition, information processing, and value-based decisions. Research on this ability has primarily focused on the integration of numerical information from a single source. Here, we examined the estimation of averages when competing sources of information are presented. We tested two theories of numeric value integration: the Compressed Mental Number Line (CMNL) predicts underestimation of averages independent of competing information; Selective Integration (SI) predicts that competing information interferes with the target information. Across four experiments, we found significant underestimation of averages in both single- and dual-stream conditions, and a limited impact of competing information on estimation. Computational modeling showed that the CMNL provides the overall better account than SI to describe estimation behavior in our data. However, about one-third of our participants were best described by SI. We also modeled the integration noise of the CMNL and found that this noise increased in the dual- compared to the single-stream conditions without affecting the representational compression. Overall, our findings clarify the role of competing information in average estimations, discover limitations in processing multiple streams, and shed light on the cognitive processes underlying sequential information integration.

衡量数字流平均值的能力是数字认知、信息处理和基于价值的决策的一个基本方面。对这种能力的研究主要集中在对单一来源的数字信息的整合上。在这里，我们研究了当出现竞争信息来源时对平均值的估计。我们测试了数值整合的两种理论：压缩心理数轴（CMNL）预测独立于竞争信息的平均值低估；选择性集成（SI）预测竞争信息对目标信息的干扰。在四个实验中，我们发现在单流和双流条件下对平均值的显著低估，以及竞争信息对估计的有限影响。计算建模表明，在描述我们数据中的估计行为方面，CMNL总体上比SI提供了更好的解释。然而，大约三分之一的参与者最适合用SI来描述。我们还对cml的集成噪声进行了建模，发现与单流条件相比，该噪声在双流条件下增加，但不影响表征压缩。总的来说，我们的研究结果阐明了竞争信息在平均估计中的作用，发现了处理多流的局限性，并阐明了顺序信息整合背后的认知过程。

{"title":"Compressed representations and attentional competition in numeric integration for average estimations","authors":"Yongming Sun , Alice Mason , Sebastian Olschewski","doi":"10.1016/j.cogpsych.2025.101780","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.cogpsych.2025.101780","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The ability to gauge the average of a number stream is a fundamental aspect of numeric cognition, information processing, and value-based decisions. Research on this ability has primarily focused on the integration of numerical information from a single source. Here, we examined the estimation of averages when competing sources of information are presented. We tested two theories of numeric value integration: the Compressed Mental Number Line (CMNL) predicts underestimation of averages independent of competing information; Selective Integration (SI) predicts that competing information interferes with the target information. Across four experiments, we found significant underestimation of averages in both single- and dual-stream conditions, and a limited impact of competing information on estimation. Computational modeling showed that the CMNL provides the overall better account than SI to describe estimation behavior in our data. However, about one-third of our participants were best described by SI. We also modeled the integration noise of the CMNL and found that this noise increased in the dual- compared to the single-stream conditions without affecting the representational compression. Overall, our findings clarify the role of competing information in average estimations, discover limitations in processing multiple streams, and shed light on the cognitive processes underlying sequential information integration.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":50669,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Psychology","volume":"162 ","pages":"Article 101780"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2025-12-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145840358","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"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

Errors, fast and slow 错误，有快有慢

IF 3 2区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY

Cognitive Psychology

Pub Date : 2025-12-12 DOI: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2025.101779

Carlos Alós-Ferrer , Michele Garagnani

Human errors in cognitive, attentional, and decision-making tasks are sometimes faster than correct responses, and sometimes slower, even for the same fixed task and experimental implementation. Several existing models can fit response time distributions exhibiting these phenomena. However, it is hard to predict ex ante (i.e., before data collection) when errors will be fast or slow. Relying on 20 different datasets comprising 31 experiments from different domains, we empirically validate a simple nonparametric model which successfully predicts when errors will be faster or slower than correct responses. The predictions also include a generalized Stroop effect, as well as error rate differences. The model applies to generalized conflict tasks, where the interaction of multiple processes determines behavior, and makes predictions which depend on whether those processes are in alignment or conflict in a given trial, which can be determined before data collection (e.g., congruent vs. incongruent trials). This yields new testable hypotheses which are overwhelmingly supported in the data. The model’s predictions can also be seen as a test of whether process multiplicity is a reasonable assumption in a given task.

人类在认知、注意力和决策任务中的错误有时比正确的反应快，有时比正确的反应慢，即使是在相同的固定任务和实验实施中也是如此。现有的几个模型可以拟合反映这些现象的响应时间分布。然而，很难事先（即在数据收集之前）预测错误是快是慢。依靠20个不同的数据集，包括来自不同领域的31个实验，我们通过经验验证了一个简单的非参数模型，该模型成功地预测了错误何时比正确的反应更快或更慢。这些预测还包括广义的斯特鲁普效应，以及错误率差异。该模型适用于广义冲突任务，其中多个过程的相互作用决定行为，并根据这些过程在给定试验中是一致还是冲突做出预测，这可以在数据收集之前确定（例如，一致性与不一致性试验）。这产生了新的可测试的假设，这些假设在数据中得到了压倒性的支持。该模型的预测也可以被看作是对给定任务中过程多重性是否合理的假设的检验。

{"title":"Errors, fast and slow","authors":"Carlos Alós-Ferrer , Michele Garagnani","doi":"10.1016/j.cogpsych.2025.101779","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.cogpsych.2025.101779","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Human errors in cognitive, attentional, and decision-making tasks are sometimes faster than correct responses, and sometimes slower, even for the same fixed task and experimental implementation. Several existing models can fit response time distributions exhibiting these phenomena. However, it is hard to predict <em>ex ante</em> (i.e., before data collection) when errors will be fast or slow. Relying on 20 different datasets comprising 31 experiments from different domains, we empirically validate a simple nonparametric model which successfully predicts when errors will be faster or slower than correct responses. The predictions also include a generalized Stroop effect, as well as error rate differences. The model applies to generalized conflict tasks, where the interaction of multiple processes determines behavior, and makes predictions which depend on whether those processes are in alignment or conflict in a given trial, which can be determined before data collection (e.g., congruent vs. incongruent trials). This yields new testable hypotheses which are overwhelmingly supported in the data. The model’s predictions can also be seen as a test of whether process multiplicity is a reasonable assumption in a given task.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":50669,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Psychology","volume":"162 ","pages":"Article 101779"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2025-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145737204","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"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 impact of phonological similarity on production effect 语音相似性对生产效果的影响

IF 3 2区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY

Cognitive Psychology

Pub Date : 2025-11-26 DOI: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2025.101770

Yu Fu , Cheng Chi , Zhan Xu

The production effect refers to the phenomenon that reading aloud results in better memory than reading silently. Researchers often use the distinctiveness account to explain the production effect. However, some studies have questioned this theory and found that, in a recognition task, homophonic interference of the targets during the retrieval stage does not affect the production effect. Based on this, four experiments were conducted in which the phonological similarity of Chinese characters was systematically manipulating to explore the impact of phonological similarity on the production effect and to further test the distinctiveness account. The findings revealed that the same pronunciation with the strongest phonological similarity could eliminate the production effect (Experiment 1a). This phenomenon remained impervious to individual differences among the participants (Experiment 1b). However, this elimination could be restored by word generation (Experiment 2). In contrast, the same tone or consonant, despite exhibiting weaker phonological similarity, did not affect the production effect. Conversely, the same vowel enhanced it (Experiment 3). The attenuating effect of identical pronunciation at retrieval on the production effect was also observed (Experiment 4). These findings indicate that the enhancement of differences in the encoding stage and the utilization of production records in the retrieval stage are key factors of the production effect which is an interaction between the production records and the experimental materials. The experimental materials affect the production effect by altering the formation and use of the records.

生产效应是指大声朗读比默读更能提高记忆力的现象。研究人员经常使用独特性理论来解释生产效应。然而，一些研究对这一理论提出了质疑，并发现在识别任务中，目标在检索阶段的谐音干扰并不影响产生效果。在此基础上，本研究进行了四个系统操纵汉字语音相似度的实验，探讨语音相似度对产生效应的影响，并进一步验证显著性解释。结果表明，语音相似性最强的同一个发音可以消除产生效应（实验1a）。这种现象不受参与者个体差异的影响（实验1b）。然而，这种消除可以通过单词生成来恢复（实验2）。相比之下，相同的音调或辅音，尽管表现出较弱的语音相似性，但并不影响生产效果。相反，同样的元音会增强它（实验3）。实验4还观察到检索时相同发音对生成效应的衰减效应。这些结果表明，编码阶段差异的增强和检索阶段生产记录的利用是生产记录与实验材料相互作用的生产效应的关键因素。实验材料通过改变记录的形成和使用来影响生产效果。

{"title":"The impact of phonological similarity on production effect","authors":"Yu Fu , Cheng Chi , Zhan Xu","doi":"10.1016/j.cogpsych.2025.101770","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.cogpsych.2025.101770","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The production effect refers to the phenomenon that reading aloud results in better memory than reading silently. Researchers often use the distinctiveness account to explain the production effect. However, some studies have questioned this theory and found that, in a recognition task, homophonic interference of the targets during the retrieval stage does not affect the production effect. Based on this, four experiments were conducted in which the phonological similarity of Chinese characters was systematically manipulating to explore the impact of phonological similarity on the production effect and to further test the distinctiveness account. The findings revealed that the same pronunciation with the strongest phonological similarity could eliminate the production effect (Experiment 1a). This phenomenon remained impervious to individual differences among the participants (Experiment 1b). However, this elimination could be restored by word generation (Experiment 2). In contrast, the same tone or consonant, despite exhibiting weaker phonological similarity, did not affect the production effect. Conversely, the same vowel enhanced it (Experiment 3). The attenuating effect of identical pronunciation at retrieval on the production effect was also observed (Experiment 4). These findings indicate that the enhancement of differences in the encoding stage and the utilization of production records in the retrieval stage are key factors of the production effect which is an interaction between the production records and the experimental materials. The experimental materials affect the production effect by altering the formation and use of the records.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":50669,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Psychology","volume":"162 ","pages":"Article 101770"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2025-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145625141","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"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

Perceiving event structure in brief actions 在简短的动作中感知事件结构

IF 3 2区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY

Cognitive Psychology

Pub Date : 2025-11-25 DOI: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2025.101768

Zekun Sun , Samuel D. McDougle

Event segmentation is a fundamental component of human perception and cognition. The field of event cognition studies how people decide where distinct events occur in incoming sensory data, how these “event boundaries” alter decision-making and memory processes, how events reveal themselves in neural activity, and how events may be represented within perception itself. The latter point is critical — the representation of events in the first place is filtered through perception. But what counts as a minimal event that is perceptible to humans? And to what extent is the perceptual representation of minimal events driven by physical properties within stimuli (e.g., sudden changes of a tennis ball’s direction when one player strikes it) versus the semantic structure of events (e.g., “step one” versus “step two” of a tennis serve)? Here, across seven preregistered experiments, we explore the perceptual representation of event structure within single brief actions, and dissociate the roles of visual features and semantic structures in the perceptual segmentation of minimal events. First, participants produced boundary labels by segmenting videos of brief physical actions (e.g., kicking a ball). Then, separate groups of observers were asked to visually detect subtle disruptions in the video clips, unaware that the disruptions systematically occurred at boundary versus non-boundary timepoints. The results consistently showed an interfering effect of event boundaries on the detection of disruptions, suggesting a spontaneous perceptual representation of action structure even in very brief single actions. Moreover, boundary effects were strongest when stimuli were presented in recognizable forms versus distorted forms that only preserved lower-level features. Thus, automatic and rapid perceptual segmentation of single actions that only last several seconds may be driven by both sensory cues and our internal models of the world.

事件分割是人类感知和认知的基本组成部分。事件认知领域研究人们如何决定不同的事件在传入的感官数据中发生的位置，这些“事件边界”如何改变决策和记忆过程，事件如何在神经活动中显示自己，以及事件如何在感知本身中表示。后一点至关重要——对事件的表征首先是通过感知过滤的。但是什么是人类可以察觉到的最小事件呢？在多大程度上，由刺激内的物理属性驱动的最小事件的感知表征（例如，当一个球员击中网球时，网球方向的突然变化）与事件的语义结构（例如，网球发球的“第一步”与“第二步”）相比？通过七个预注册实验，我们探索了单个简短动作中事件结构的感知表征，并分离了视觉特征和语义结构在最小事件感知分割中的作用。首先，参与者通过分割简短的身体动作（例如，踢球）的视频来产生边界标签。然后，不同的观察者组被要求在视觉上发现视频片段中微妙的中断，不知道中断系统地发生在边界和非边界时间点。结果一致表明，事件边界对中断的检测有干扰作用，表明即使在非常短暂的单个动作中，对动作结构也有自发的感知表征。此外，当刺激以可识别的形式呈现时，边界效应最强，而扭曲的形式只保留了较低水平的特征。因此，仅持续几秒钟的单个动作的自动和快速感知分割可能是由感官线索和我们的内部世界模型驱动的。

{"title":"Perceiving event structure in brief actions","authors":"Zekun Sun , Samuel D. McDougle","doi":"10.1016/j.cogpsych.2025.101768","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.cogpsych.2025.101768","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Event segmentation is a fundamental component of human perception and cognition. The field of event cognition studies how people decide where distinct events occur in incoming sensory data, how these “event boundaries” alter decision-making and memory processes, how events reveal themselves in neural activity, and how events may be represented within perception itself. The latter point is critical — the representation of events in the first place is filtered through perception. But what counts as a minimal event that is perceptible to humans? And to what extent is the perceptual representation of minimal events driven by physical properties within stimuli (e.g., sudden changes of a tennis ball’s direction when one player strikes it) versus the semantic structure of events (e.g., “step one” versus “step two” of a tennis serve)? Here, across seven preregistered experiments, we explore the perceptual representation of event structure <em>within</em> single brief actions, and dissociate the roles of visual features and semantic structures in the perceptual segmentation of minimal events. First, participants produced boundary labels by segmenting videos of brief physical actions (e.g., kicking a ball). Then, separate groups of observers were asked to visually detect subtle disruptions in the video clips, unaware that the disruptions systematically occurred at boundary versus non-boundary timepoints. The results consistently showed an interfering effect of event boundaries on the detection of disruptions, suggesting a spontaneous perceptual representation of action structure even in very brief single actions. Moreover, boundary effects were strongest when stimuli were presented in recognizable forms versus distorted forms that only preserved lower-level features. Thus, automatic and rapid perceptual segmentation of single actions that only last several seconds may be driven by both sensory cues and our internal models of the world.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":50669,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Psychology","volume":"162 ","pages":"Article 101768"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2025-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145584179","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"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

How sampling strategies shape experience-based risky choice 抽样策略如何塑造基于经验的风险选择。

IF 3 2区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY

Cognitive Psychology

Pub Date : 2025-11-01 DOI: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2025.101769

Linus Hof , Veronika Zilker , Thorsten Pachur

Hallmark phenomena of risky choice, such as risk aversion and deviations from expected value (EV) maximization, are commonly modeled with psychoeconomic curves (e.g., utility function, probability weighting function). Yet these functions describe choices rather than the cognitive processes that generate them. Here, we examine how aspects of the oft-neglected process of information search – in particular, switching between options during sampling and stopping based on sampled evidence – can give rise to patterns in experience-based risky choice in the context of the sampling paradigm. We develop a computational framework that conceptualizes sampling strategies as consisting of three building blocks: a search rule (governing the rate of switching between options during sampling), a comparison rule (roundwise vs. summary evaluation of the options), and a stopping rule (decision threshold). In simulation analyses comparing different combinations of these building blocks, we show that frequent switching increases EV-maximizing choices for strategies with a summary comparison rule, but decreases maximization for strategies with a roundwise comparison rule. Further, frequent switching promotes an apparent underweighting of rarely experienced events found under the roundwise comparison rule, and curtails overweighting found under the summary comparison rule. We also reveal how the sampling strategies give rise to different risk attitudes depending on the existence and attractiveness of rare events. Finally, an empirical analysis suggests that people combine switching behavior and comparison rules in a way that fosters EV-maximizing choices. Our results underscore the possible contribution of search processes to patterns in risky choice.

风险选择的标志性现象，如风险厌恶和偏离期望值（EV）最大化，通常用心理经济学曲线（如效用函数、概率加权函数）建模。然而，这些功能描述的是选择，而不是产生选择的认知过程。在这里，我们研究了经常被忽视的信息搜索过程的各个方面——特别是在抽样和基于抽样证据的停止之间的选择切换——如何在抽样范式的背景下产生基于经验的风险选择模式。我们开发了一个计算框架，该框架将采样策略概念化为由三个构建块组成：搜索规则（控制采样期间选项之间切换的速率），比较规则（对选项进行全面评估与总结评估）和停止规则（决策阈值）。在比较这些构建块的不同组合的仿真分析中，我们表明频繁的切换增加了具有摘要比较规则的策略的ev最大化选择，但减少了具有圆形比较规则的策略的最大化选择。此外，频繁的切换促进了在圆形比较规则下发现的很少经历的事件的明显加权过低，并减少了在汇总比较规则下发现的加权过高。我们还揭示了抽样策略如何根据罕见事件的存在和吸引力引起不同的风险态度。最后，一项实证分析表明，人们将切换行为和比较规则结合起来，以促进ev最大化的选择。我们的结果强调了搜索过程对风险选择模式的可能贡献。

{"title":"How sampling strategies shape experience-based risky choice","authors":"Linus Hof , Veronika Zilker , Thorsten Pachur","doi":"10.1016/j.cogpsych.2025.101769","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.cogpsych.2025.101769","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Hallmark phenomena of risky choice, such as risk aversion and deviations from expected value (EV) maximization, are commonly modeled with psychoeconomic curves (e.g., utility function, probability weighting function). Yet these functions describe choices rather than the cognitive processes that generate them. Here, we examine how aspects of the oft-neglected process of information search – in particular, switching between options during sampling and stopping based on sampled evidence – can give rise to patterns in experience-based risky choice in the context of the sampling paradigm. We develop a computational framework that conceptualizes sampling strategies as consisting of three building blocks: a search rule (governing the rate of switching between options during sampling), a comparison rule (roundwise vs. summary evaluation of the options), and a stopping rule (decision threshold). In simulation analyses comparing different combinations of these building blocks, we show that frequent switching increases EV-maximizing choices for strategies with a summary comparison rule, but decreases maximization for strategies with a roundwise comparison rule. Further, frequent switching promotes an apparent underweighting of rarely experienced events found under the roundwise comparison rule, and curtails overweighting found under the summary comparison rule. We also reveal how the sampling strategies give rise to different risk attitudes depending on the existence and attractiveness of rare events. Finally, an empirical analysis suggests that people combine switching behavior and comparison rules in a way that fosters EV-maximizing choices. Our results underscore the possible contribution of search processes to patterns in risky choice.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":50669,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Psychology","volume":"161 ","pages":"Article 101769"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2025-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145446492","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"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

Evaluating three independent-channels models of temporal-order and simultaneity judgment 评价时间顺序和同时性判断的三种独立通道模型

IF 3 2区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY

Cognitive Psychology

Pub Date : 2025-10-23 DOI: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2025.101767

Paul Kelber, Rolf Ulrich

How do people judge the temporal order and simultaneity/successiveness of events? Three candidate models can explain the theoretically constraining shapes of the psychometric functions observed in tasks with more complex response formats. First, the response-error model allows that internal states generated by a triggered-moments process are misreported due to finger errors, requiring that psychometric functions are parallel after empirically accounting for finger errors (parallelism) and that successiveness perception is necessary for temporal-order perception (necessity). Second, the two-stage model posits that two independent and serial processes generate simultaneity/successiveness and temporal-order judgments, requiring that temporal-order judgment accuracy does not depend on simultaneity/successiveness judgment accuracy (independence) and that simultaneity responses are not slower than order responses (seriality). Third, the two-threshold model formalizes the idea that the order threshold can be higher than the successiveness threshold, requiring necessity and that the order threshold is not lower than the successiveness threshold (threshold inequality). Five experiments evaluated these model assumptions against precise individual data collected with audio-visual and visual stimuli in temporal-order judgment, simultaneity judgment, ternary-response, and dual-response tasks. The response-error model was invalidated by near-universal violations of parallelism in 63/64 tests, and the two-stage model by consistent violations of independence (20/20) and predominant violations of seriality (30/44). By contrast, the threshold inequality in the two-threshold model was satisfied in 39/40 tests, whereas necessity was violated in 10/20 tests. Joint model fits across the four tasks also revealed that the two-threshold model provides the best general account of temporal judgment. We conclude that the two-threshold model is the least inadequate of the three candidate models, and consider a generalized two-threshold model with fluctuating criteria to address violations of necessity.

人们如何判断事件的时间顺序和同时性/连续性？三个候选模型可以解释在具有更复杂反应格式的任务中观察到的心理测量功能的理论约束形状。首先，反应误差模型允许由触发时刻过程产生的内部状态由于手指误差而被误报，这要求在经验计算手指误差（平行性）之后心理测量函数是平行的，并且连续感知对于时间顺序感知（必要性）是必要的。第二，两阶段模型假设两个独立且连续的过程产生同时性/连续性和时间顺序判断，要求时间顺序判断的准确性不依赖于同时性/连续性判断的准确性（独立性），同时性反应并不比顺序反应慢（连续性）。第三，双阈值模型形式化了顺序阈值可以高于连续阈值的思想，这需要必要性，并且顺序阈值不低于连续阈值（阈值不等式）。在时间顺序判断、同时性判断、三重反应和双重反应任务中，通过视听和视觉刺激收集的精确个人数据，五个实验对这些模型假设进行了评估。响应误差模型在63/64测试中几乎普遍违反并行性，两阶段模型在一致违反独立性（20/20）和主要违反串行性（30/44）的情况下无效。相比之下，39/40次检验满足双阈值模型的阈值不等式，10/20次检验违背了必要性。联合模型对四个任务的拟合也表明，双阈值模型提供了时间判断的最佳一般解释。我们得出结论，双阈值模型是三个候选模型中最不充分的，并考虑一个具有波动标准的广义双阈值模型来解决必要的违规行为。

{"title":"Evaluating three independent-channels models of temporal-order and simultaneity judgment","authors":"Paul Kelber, Rolf Ulrich","doi":"10.1016/j.cogpsych.2025.101767","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.cogpsych.2025.101767","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>How do people judge the temporal order and simultaneity/successiveness of events? Three candidate models can explain the theoretically constraining shapes of the psychometric functions observed in tasks with more complex response formats. First, the response-error model allows that internal states generated by a triggered-moments process are misreported due to finger errors, requiring that psychometric functions are parallel after empirically accounting for finger errors (parallelism) and that successiveness perception is necessary for temporal-order perception (necessity). Second, the two-stage model posits that two independent and serial processes generate simultaneity/successiveness and temporal-order judgments, requiring that temporal-order judgment accuracy does not depend on simultaneity/successiveness judgment accuracy (independence) and that simultaneity responses are not slower than order responses (seriality). Third, the two-threshold model formalizes the idea that the order threshold can be higher than the successiveness threshold, requiring necessity and that the order threshold is not lower than the successiveness threshold (threshold inequality). Five experiments evaluated these model assumptions against precise individual data collected with audio-visual and visual stimuli in temporal-order judgment, simultaneity judgment, ternary-response, and dual-response tasks. The response-error model was invalidated by near-universal violations of parallelism in 63/64 tests, and the two-stage model by consistent violations of independence (20/20) and predominant violations of seriality (30/44). By contrast, the threshold inequality in the two-threshold model was satisfied in 39/40 tests, whereas necessity was violated in 10/20 tests. Joint model fits across the four tasks also revealed that the two-threshold model provides the best general account of temporal judgment. We conclude that the two-threshold model is the least inadequate of the three candidate models, and consider a generalized two-threshold model with fluctuating criteria to address violations of necessity.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":50669,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Psychology","volume":"161 ","pages":"Article 101767"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2025-10-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145362891","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"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 intelligibility of consonants in American English infant-directed speech 美国英语婴儿指向语中辅音的可理解性。

IF 3 2区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY

Cognitive Psychology

Pub Date : 2025-10-13 DOI: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2025.101766

Daniel Swingley

To begin learning their language, infants must locate words in the speech signal. Some models of word discovery presuppose that the discovery process depends on identifying phonetic segments (phones) in speech. To test the plausibility of models arguing that infants can reliably categorize consonants in speech, adult native speakers were asked to identify the consonant in vowel-consonant-vowel sequences extracted from spontaneous English infant-directed speech. Listeners could consistently identify some instances of consonants (for example, correctly indicating that an /s/ was an /s/). But many tokens (about half) were not consistently identifiable. Performance was significantly worse for codas than onsets. Providing the full utterance context in low-pass-filtered form did not aid recognition, nor did familiarization with the talker. In a second task, listeners were barely above chance in guessing whether a consonant was a word onset or a word-final coda. Performance on infant-directed speech was not markedly better than performance on a comparison set of adult-directed speech consonants. Erroneous responses frequently had little systematic resemblance to the correct answer. The results suggest that it is not plausible that infants can parse most utterances exhaustively into strings of uttered speech sounds and feed those strings into a statistical clustering mechanism.

为了开始学习他们的语言，婴儿必须在语音信号中定位单词。一些单词发现模型假定发现过程依赖于识别语音中的音段（电话）。为了验证婴儿能够可靠地对语音中的辅音进行分类的模型的合理性，研究人员要求母语为英语的成人识别从婴儿自发语音中提取的元音-辅音-元音序列中的辅音。听者可以一致地识别辅音的一些实例（例如，正确地指出an /s/是an /s/）。但许多令牌（大约一半）无法始终识别。结束时的表现明显比开始时差。以低通过滤的形式提供完整的话语上下文无助于识别，也无助于熟悉说话者。在第二个任务中，听者猜测一个辅音是单词的开头还是单词的结尾，几乎没有高出机会。婴儿定向语音的表现并不明显好于成人定向语音辅音的比较。错误的回答往往与正确答案没有系统的相似之处。结果表明，婴儿不可能将大多数话语详尽地解析为发出的语音串，并将这些串输入统计聚类机制。

{"title":"The intelligibility of consonants in American English infant-directed speech","authors":"Daniel Swingley","doi":"10.1016/j.cogpsych.2025.101766","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.cogpsych.2025.101766","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>To begin learning their language, infants must locate words in the speech signal. Some models of word discovery presuppose that the discovery process depends on identifying phonetic segments (phones) in speech. To test the plausibility of models arguing that infants can reliably categorize consonants in speech, adult native speakers were asked to identify the consonant in vowel-consonant-vowel sequences extracted from spontaneous English infant-directed speech. Listeners could consistently identify some instances of consonants (for example, correctly indicating that an /s/ was an /s/). But many tokens (about half) were not consistently identifiable. Performance was significantly worse for codas than onsets. Providing the full utterance context in low-pass-filtered form did not aid recognition, nor did familiarization with the talker. In a second task, listeners were barely above chance in guessing whether a consonant was a word onset or a word-final coda. Performance on infant-directed speech was not markedly better than performance on a comparison set of adult-directed speech consonants. Erroneous responses frequently had little systematic resemblance to the correct answer. The results suggest that it is not plausible that infants can parse most utterances exhaustively into strings of uttered speech sounds and feed those strings into a statistical clustering mechanism.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":50669,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Psychology","volume":"161 ","pages":"Article 101766"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2025-10-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145294243","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"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 psychophysics of compositionality: Relational scene perception occurs in a canonical order 组合性的心理物理学：关系场景感知以规范顺序发生

IF 3 2区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY

Cognitive Psychology

Pub Date : 2025-10-11 DOI: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2025.101765

Zekun Sun , Chaz Firestone , Alon Hafri

We see not only objects and their features (e.g., glass vases or wooden tables) but also relations between them (e.g., a vase on a table). An emerging view accounts for such relational representations by positing that visual perception is compositional: Much like language, where words combine to form phrases and sentences, many visual representations contain discrete constituents that combine systematically. This perspective raises a fundamental question: What principles guide the composition of relational representations, and how are they built over time? Here, we tested the hypothesis that the mind constructs relational representations in a canonical order. Inspired by a distinction from cognitive linguistics, we predicted that ‘reference’ objects (typically large, stable, and able to physically control other objects; e.g., tables) take precedence over ‘figure’ objects (e.g., vases) during scene composition. In Experiment 1, participants who arranged items to match linguistic descriptions (e.g., “The vase is on the table”, “The table is supporting the vase”) consistently placed reference objects first (e.g., table, then vase). Experiments 2–5 extended these findings to visual recognition itself: participants were faster to verify scene descriptions when reference objects appeared before figure objects in a scene, rather than vice versa. This Reference-first advantage emerged rapidly (within 100 ms), persisted in a purely visual task, and reflected abstract principles (e.g., physical forces) beyond simple differences in size or shape. Our findings reveal psychophysical principles underlying compositionality in visual processing: the mind builds representations of object relations sequentially, guided by the objects’ roles in those relations.

我们不仅看到物体及其特征（例如，玻璃花瓶或木桌），还看到它们之间的关系（例如，桌子上的花瓶）。一种新兴的观点认为，视觉感知是组合的，从而解释了这种关系表征：就像语言一样，单词组合成短语和句子，许多视觉表征包含有系统组合的离散成分。这种观点提出了一个基本问题：什么原则指导关系表示的组合，它们是如何随着时间的推移而构建的？在这里，我们测试了大脑以规范顺序构建关系表征的假设。受认知语言学区别的启发，我们预测在场景构图中，“参考”对象（通常是大的、稳定的、能够物理控制其他对象的对象，如桌子）优先于“人物”对象（如花瓶）。在实验1中，按照语言描述（例如，“花瓶在桌子上”，“桌子支撑着花瓶”）安排物品的参与者始终将参考物体放在前面（例如，桌子，然后是花瓶）。实验2-5将这些发现扩展到视觉识别本身：当参考物体在场景中出现在人物物体之前时，参与者更快地验证场景描述，反之亦然。这种参照优先的优势迅速出现（在100毫秒内），在纯粹的视觉任务中持续存在，并反映出尺寸或形状上的简单差异之外的抽象原则（例如，物理力量）。我们的研究结果揭示了视觉处理中构成性的心理物理原理：大脑在客体关系中的角色引导下，顺序地构建客体关系的表征。

{"title":"The psychophysics of compositionality: Relational scene perception occurs in a canonical order","authors":"Zekun Sun , Chaz Firestone , Alon Hafri","doi":"10.1016/j.cogpsych.2025.101765","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.cogpsych.2025.101765","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>We see not only objects and their features (e.g., glass vases or wooden tables) but also relations between them (e.g., a vase on a table). An emerging view accounts for such relational representations by positing that visual perception is compositional: Much like language, where words combine to form phrases and sentences, many visual representations contain discrete constituents that combine systematically. This perspective raises a fundamental question: What principles guide the composition of relational representations, and how are they built over time? Here, we tested the hypothesis that the mind constructs relational representations in a canonical order. Inspired by a distinction from cognitive linguistics, we predicted that ‘reference’ objects (typically large, stable, and able to physically control other objects; e.g., tables) take precedence over ‘figure’ objects (e.g., vases) during scene composition. In Experiment 1, participants who arranged items to match linguistic descriptions (e.g., “The vase is on the table”, “The table is supporting the vase”) consistently placed reference objects first (e.g., table, then vase). Experiments 2–5 extended these findings to visual recognition itself: participants were faster to verify scene descriptions when reference objects appeared before figure objects in a scene, rather than vice versa. This Reference-first advantage emerged rapidly (within 100 ms), persisted in a purely visual task, and reflected abstract principles (e.g., physical forces) beyond simple differences in size or shape. Our findings reveal psychophysical principles underlying compositionality in visual processing: the mind builds representations of object relations sequentially, guided by the objects’ roles in those relations.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":50669,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Psychology","volume":"161 ","pages":"Article 101765"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2025-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145267947","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"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

Forest before trees? It depends on not only what you see, but also what you hear 森林先于树木？这不仅取决于你所看到的，也取决于你所听到的

IF 3 2区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY

Cognitive Psychology

Pub Date : 2025-09-08 DOI: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2025.101764

Xiaoyu Tang , Haoming Liu , Heming Zhang , Yufeng He , Xinzhong Cui , Wanlong Liu , Yan Sun , Jiaying Sun , Jing Fu

Prior researches on global–local processing have focused on hierarchical objects in the visual modality, while the real-world involves multisensory interactions. The present study investigated whether the simultaneous presentation of auditory stimuli influences the recognition of visually hierarchical objects. We added four types of auditory stimuli to the traditional visual hierarchical letters paradigm: no sound (visual-only), a pure tone, a spoken letter that was congruent with the required response (response-congruent), or a spoken letter that was incongruent with it (response-incongruent). The data were modeled using a hierarchical drift–diffusion model (HDDM). In Experiment 1, the participants were asked to discriminate the global or local visual letters accompanied by these sounds. Experiment 2 eliminated the global advantage effect by enlarging stimuli to isolate interference mechanisms. Results revealed that response-incongruent speech attenuated both the global advantage effect and robustly reduced the global interference effect across experiments. HDDM analysis demonstrated dual-stage modulation: 1) Perceptual delays during congruent local trials, indicating attentional capture; 2) Decision-stage disruption during local processing, reflecting impaired evidence accumulation for conflict resolution. Critically, only semantically incongruent speech altered decision dynamics, while pure tones affected only perceptual encoding. This study provides new insights into multisensory interactions, showing how auditory stimuli interfere with visual global local perception through attentional filtering mechanisms at different stages of processing.

先前对全局-局部处理的研究主要集中在视觉模态中的层次对象，而现实世界涉及多感官相互作用。本研究探讨了听觉刺激的同时呈现是否会影响视觉层次物体的识别。我们在传统的视觉分层字母范式中添加了四种类型的听觉刺激：没有声音（仅视觉），纯音，与要求的反应一致的口语字母（反应一致），或与要求的反应不一致的口语字母（反应不一致）。数据采用分层漂移-扩散模型（HDDM）建模。在实验1中，参与者被要求区分伴随这些声音的整体或局部视觉字母。实验2通过扩大刺激来隔离干扰机制，消除了全局优势效应。结果表明，反应不一致语音在降低全局优势效应的同时，也显著降低了实验间的全局干扰效应。HDDM分析显示了双阶段调制：1)一致性局部试验中的知觉延迟，表明注意捕获；2)局部处理过程中的决策阶段中断，反映了解决冲突的证据积累受损。关键的是，只有语义不一致的言语才会改变决策动态，而纯音只会影响感知编码。本研究为多感官相互作用提供了新的见解，揭示了听觉刺激如何通过不同加工阶段的注意过滤机制干扰视觉全局局部感知。

{"title":"Forest before trees? It depends on not only what you see, but also what you hear","authors":"Xiaoyu Tang , Haoming Liu , Heming Zhang , Yufeng He , Xinzhong Cui , Wanlong Liu , Yan Sun , Jiaying Sun , Jing Fu","doi":"10.1016/j.cogpsych.2025.101764","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.cogpsych.2025.101764","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Prior researches on global–local processing have focused on hierarchical objects in the visual modality, while the real-world involves multisensory interactions. The present study investigated whether the simultaneous presentation of auditory stimuli influences the recognition of visually hierarchical objects. We added four types of auditory stimuli to the traditional visual hierarchical letters paradigm:no sound (visual-only), a pure tone, a spoken letter that was congruent with the required response (response-congruent), or a spoken letter that was incongruent with it (response-incongruent).The data were modeled using a hierarchical drift–diffusion model (HDDM). In Experiment 1, the participants were asked to discriminate the global or local visual letters accompanied by these sounds. Experiment 2 eliminated the global advantage effect by enlarging stimuli to isolate interference mechanisms. Results revealed that response-incongruent speech attenuated both the global advantage effect and robustly reduced the global interference effect across experiments. HDDM analysis demonstrated dual-stage modulation: 1) Perceptual delays during congruent local trials, indicating attentional capture; 2) Decision-stage disruption during local processing, reflecting impaired evidence accumulation for conflict resolution. Critically, only semantically incongruent speech altered decision dynamics, while pure tones affected only perceptual encoding. This study provides new insights into multisensory interactions, showing how auditory stimuli interfere with visual global local perception through attentional filtering mechanisms at different stages of processing.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":50669,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Psychology","volume":"161 ","pages":"Article 101764"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2025-09-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145011305","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"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