心理科学进展
心理科學進展
심이과학진전
Advances In Psychological Science
2013年
5期
792~799
,共null页
刘希平 张环 唐卫海 冯虹
劉希平 張環 唐衛海 馮虹
류희평 장배 당위해 풍홍
协作抑制 提取策略破坏假说 提取抑制假说 集体记忆
協作抑製 提取策略破壞假說 提取抑製假說 集體記憶
협작억제 제취책략파배가설 제취억제가설 집체기억
: collaborative inhibition; retrieval strategy disruption hypothesis; retrieval inhibition hypothesis; collective memory
协作抑制是指当人们在一个记忆小组中一起提取信息的时候,小组提取的信息总量比等量个体提取的信息总量要少。心理学研究者致力于从认知角度对该现象进行解释,主要的理论解释有提取策略破坏假说和提取抑制假说。前者认为小组成员的提取结果对组内其他成员的信息组织策略产生了干扰,导致小组的提取成绩低。而后者认为小组内成员的提取结果会抑制其他成员对非提取项目的表征,降低小组协作提取能力,出现协作抑制。本文对两种理论假说的提出背景,基本观点,证据支持及现有争论进行了介绍,同时指出了未来的研究应关注于对两种机制的关键矛盾点进行区别性检验、对不同认知机制在不同条件下成立可靠性的检验以及通过对编码阶段进行操控来进一步考察协作抑制的认知机制。
協作抑製是指噹人們在一箇記憶小組中一起提取信息的時候,小組提取的信息總量比等量箇體提取的信息總量要少。心理學研究者緻力于從認知角度對該現象進行解釋,主要的理論解釋有提取策略破壞假說和提取抑製假說。前者認為小組成員的提取結果對組內其他成員的信息組織策略產生瞭榦擾,導緻小組的提取成績低。而後者認為小組內成員的提取結果會抑製其他成員對非提取項目的錶徵,降低小組協作提取能力,齣現協作抑製。本文對兩種理論假說的提齣揹景,基本觀點,證據支持及現有爭論進行瞭介紹,同時指齣瞭未來的研究應關註于對兩種機製的關鍵矛盾點進行區彆性檢驗、對不同認知機製在不同條件下成立可靠性的檢驗以及通過對編碼階段進行操控來進一步攷察協作抑製的認知機製。
협작억제시지당인문재일개기억소조중일기제취신식적시후,소조제취적신식총량비등량개체제취적신식총량요소。심이학연구자치력우종인지각도대해현상진행해석,주요적이론해석유제취책략파배가설화제취억제가설。전자인위소조성원적제취결과대조내기타성원적신식조직책략산생료간우,도치소조적제취성적저。이후자인위소조내성원적제취결과회억제기타성원대비제취항목적표정,강저소조협작제취능력,출현협작억제。본문대량충이론가설적제출배경,기본관점,증거지지급현유쟁론진행료개소,동시지출료미래적연구응관주우대량충궤제적관건모순점진행구별성검험、대불동인지궤제재불동조건하성립가고성적검험이급통과대편마계단진행조공래진일보고찰협작억제적인지궤제。
The Collaborative Inhibition refers to that when individuals work together to retrieve information as a group, the collaborative group would recall less than the polled, non-redundant information recalled by the same number of individuals working alone (a nominal group). Researchers try to explain the collaborative inhibition effect in cognitive views such as retrieval strategy disruption hypotheses and retrieval inhibition hypotheses. The article makes a special focus on those two hypotheses in the introduction part. We also convey an analysis of recent studies which support those hypotheses respectively in details. And this review pays attention to the researches which the two hypotheses cannot explain as well. Future studies should focus on: (1)Whether the retrieval strategy disruption or the retrieval inhibition contributes to the collaborative inhibition? (2)Do the speaker's recall cause the listener's selective forgetting in a collaborative group? (3)If we alter the conditions in the encoding phase, does the collaborative inhibition will remain stationary? Does the extent of the collaborative inhibition change? Future studies should also demonstrate the above two hypotheses and explain the cognitive mechanism of collaborative inhibition appropriately.