CAJ | 학술논문

采用2（组别暴力组和非暴力组）×3（目标刺激类型：中性面孔、愤怒面孔和高兴面孔）的混合实验设计，探讨了暴力犯罪者对负性情绪刺激的注意偏向特点。行为数据显示，相比非暴力组，暴力组对愤怒面孔的反应要显著快于高兴面孔，初步验证了暴力犯罪者对负性情绪信息的敏感性。采用jackknife对潜伏期数据分析表明，暴力组对愤怒面孔的N2pc潜伏期要显著早于高兴面孔，而非暴力组对愤怒面孔和高兴面孔的N2pc潜伏期差异不显著，说明暴力犯罪者对愤怒面孔的警觉早于高兴面孔，进一步说明暴力犯对负性情绪信息更为敏感。但波幅分析表明暴力犯对愤怒面孔的N2pc波幅并没有大于高兴面孔的N2pc波幅，即暴力犯对负性情绪信息只存在早期的警觉，之后并没有对负性情绪信息投入更多的注意资源。
채용2（조별폭력조화비폭력조）×3（목표자격류형：중성면공、분노면공화고흥면공）적혼합실험설계，탐토료폭력범죄자대부성정서자격적주의편향특점。행위수거현시，상비비폭력조，폭력조대분노면공적반응요현저쾌우고흥면공，초보험증료폭력범죄자대부성정서신식적민감성。채용jackknife대잠복기수거분석표명，폭력조대분노면공적N2pc잠복기요현저조우고흥면공，이비폭력조대분노면공화고흥면공적N2pc잠복기차이불현저，설명폭력범죄자대분노면공적경각조우고흥면공，진일보설명폭력범대부성정서신식경위민감。단파폭분석표명폭력범대분노면공적N2pc파폭병몰유대우고흥면공적N2pc파폭，즉폭력범대부성정서신식지존재조기적경각，지후병몰유대부성정서신식투입경다적주의자원。
The violent crime is a highlighted problem of modern society, and it is always having a devastating impact on individuals andtheir families. Until now, there has been a relative dearth of research on the effects of neurocognitive factors on violent offenders. Aneurocognitive perspective on violent offenders suggests that violent offenders have signi？ cant cognitive impairments that may contributeto their violent lifestyle. Eckhardt el al. （ 1998 ） observed that batterers tended to commit a variety of cognitive errors. While the sourceof these cognitive errors is not known, one hypothesis is that violent offenders have a bias towards over- allocating attentional resourcesto negative affective stimuli. The present study used event - related potentials （ERP） to investigate whether violent offenders are morevigilant to negative emotion. The N2pc ERP component was measured as an index of the allocation of spatial attention. This study teststhe hypotheses that violent offenders have a neurocognitive bias favoring negative affect （angry face） stimuli. We recruited 26 male inmates from a local prison, 13 violent offenders, 13 nonviolent offenders. Besides, there were no signifi-cance difference between violent and nonviolent offenders on the state anxiety and Aggression Questionnaire （p 〉0 . 05 ）. Three malesubjects were excluded from data analysis because of excessive artifacts during EEG recording. Facial stimuli, which were made by theFaeegen Modeller program, were used to convey negative information. The faces were comprised by four individuals （2 females） eachposing neutral, happy, and angry expressions. The external features of each of the faces were removed and the internal features werepresented in a black rectangular frame. The experiment was comprised of five blocks. For each block, 128 trials were delivered. The faces were presented for 500 ms, fol-lowed by a random fixation between 500 - 1000 ms. The subjects were told to search the target face （angry or happy face） and responseas soon as possible, or for a 1800 ms maximum. The inter -trial interval was randomly varied between 500 and 1500 ms. Electroen-cephalography （EEG） data were recorded from 64 scalp sites using tin electrodes mounted in an elastic cap （ brain products）. Analysesfocused on the correct response trials only and on lateral occipital electrodes （ POT/PO8 ） within 240 - 380 ms. A two - way repeatedmeasures analysis of variance （ANOVA） on the RT and average latencies was conducted, with group （violent vs. nonviolent offender）as a between- subjects factor, and target face （happy, angry, neutral） as a within -subjects factor. The ANOVA for RT revealed asigni？ cant main effect for group （violent vs. nonviolent offenders） , F（ 1,21 ） = 7.99 ,p 〈. 01, and target face （happy, neural Vs an-gry face）, F（2,42） = 14. 57,p 〈. 01. Notably, the group x target face interaction was also signi？ cant, F（2,42） =3.49,p 〈. 05）.The post hoe analysis indicated that RTs were signi？ cantly shorter for violent offenders when the target face was ＂ angry＂ relative to ＂neutral＂ and ＂happy＂. The ANOVA for N2pc response latencies revealed a signi？ cant effect for group target face, F （1,21） =9.66 ,p 〈0. 01. Further analysis revealed violent offenders showed significantly shorter response lateneies when the target face was ＂angry＂ relative to ＂happy＂. There was no significant difference for nonviolent offenders when the target face was ＂angry＂ and ＂happy＂. These findings suggest that violent offenders have attentional bias for negative affect information compared with nonviolent offend-ers, which have been proved from the behavioral and ERP data.