心理技术与应用 ›› 2016, Vol. 4 ›› Issue (4): 195-203.doi: 10.16842/j.cnki.issn2095-5588.2016.04.001

• •    下一篇

空间特征信息对时距知觉的影响

潘泠静;邓铸   

  1. (南京师范大学心理学院,南京210097)
  • 出版日期:2016-04-01 发布日期:2016-04-01

The Influence of Space Characteristics on Duration Perception in Linguistic and Nonlinguistic Context

PAN Lingjing; DENG Zhu   

  1. (School of Psychology, Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing 210097, China)
  • Online:2016-04-01 Published:2016-04-01

摘要: 文章考察了含四种空间特征信息的语言刺激(“长”“短”“宽”“窄”)和非语言刺激(长线段、短线段、宽矩形、窄矩形)对时距知觉的影响。实验一采用时间等分任务,实验二采用复制法。结果发现,当时距为400~1600ms及4000ms时,“长”“短”分别引起时距的高估、低估;当时距为2000ms时,“长”“短”分别引起时距的低估、高估;“宽”“窄”及非语言刺激对时距知觉没有显著性的影响。结果表明:“长”和“短”显著影响时距知觉,并存在导向与干扰两种影响;语言和非语言的空间特征信息对时距知觉的影响存在差异。

关键词: 空间特征;时间的空间隐喻;时距知觉

Abstract: Previous research has demonstrated that the concept of time is recognized through space, which is known as spatial metaphor for time, but it still remains to be seen whether such metaphor will affect time perception. Also, previous research has indicated that spatial distance has effect on the processing of time. Do people think about time using language containing spatial metaphor? Further, do people also perceive time using space information even when they are not using language? Current research studied the influence of linguistic and nonlinguistic stimuli containing four kinds of space characteristics (long, short, wide, narrow) on duration perception. Linguistic stimuli consisted of four Chinese words “long”, “short”, “wide” and “narrow”, while nonlinguistic stimuli consisted of a long line, a short line, a wide rectangle and a narrow rectangle. Two experiments, both of which used multifactor mixed design, were conducted to comprehensively investigate the impact of space characteristics on duration perception in a wide range of time. Experiment 1 used temporal bisection task, in which participants were trained to distinguish between two different exposure durations. Participants were then shown stimuli presented at a number of durations (400, 600, 800, 1000, 1200, 1400, 1600ms) that fall between the two learned durations (400ms and 1600ms), and were asked to indicate whether the test stimulus was closer in duration to the shorter or longer learned item. Experiment 2 used time reproduction method, in which participants were shown stimuli presented at two durations (2000ms and 4000ms). Participants were then asked to reproduce the duration of the test stimulus by pressing the space bar twice, between which the time interval was counted as its reproduction time. Results showed that at 400~1600ms as well as 4000ms, “long” was perceived to have been shown longer and “short” was perceived to have been shown shorter, while at 2000ms, “long” was perceived to have been shown shorter and “short” was perceived to have been shown longer. Both in experiment 1 and 2, “wide”, “narrow” and all the nonlinguistic stimuli had no significant effect on duration perception. Also, there was a tendency that nonlinguistic stimuli were perceived to have been shown shorter than the linguistic stimuli. In addition, the duration of 2000ms was overestimated while the duration of 4000ms was neither overestimated nor underestimated. These results reveal that: (1) spatial words “long” and “short” influence perceived duration in two different ways that they whether guide or interfere with it; (2) spatial words “wide” and “narrow” as well as nonlinguistic information of space characteristics, do not affect duration perception; (3) linguistic and nonlinguistic information of space characteristics has different effects on duration perception; (4) shorter duration (2000ms) tends to be overestimated compared to longer duration (4000ms). In conclusion, the present research has found a new and interesting phenomenon in which the duration of the spatial word “long” tends to be underestimated and that of “short” tends to be overestimated. Such phenomenon, which only exists when the duration is 2000ms, deserves further study.

Key words: space characteristics; spatial metaphor for time; duration perception

中图分类号: 

  • B842.2
[1] 刘 伟, 贾玉雪. 特征信息和呈现时间对异族面孔知觉的影响[J]. 心理技术与应用, 2021, 9(4): 229-235.
[2] 王亚如, 张 丽. 负债感的最新研究进展[J]. 心理技术与应用, 2020, 8(3): 172-184.
[3] 常保瑞, 方建东. 社会经济地位对主观幸福感的影响:可协商命运观的中介作用[J]. 心理技术与应用, 2018, 6(11): 641-648.
[4] 袁上清, 孙 铁, 郑鹭鸣, 肖 风. 应激对不同动态条件的内隐时间特征的作用[J]. 心理技术与应用, 2018, 6(9): 543-548.
[5] 陈必忠. 社交网站积极自我呈现与主观幸福感:多重中介模型[J]. 心理技术与应用, 2018, 6(9): 528-536.
[6] . 品牌本真性的三个层级与心理机制[J]. 心理技术与应用, 2018, 6(6): 321-333.
[7] . 虚拟现实技术缓解急性疼痛的心理机制[J]. 心理技术与应用, 2018, 6(4): 232-244.
[8] . 奖赏与负性分心情绪刺激对知觉的影响[J]. 心理技术与应用, 2018, 6(3): 137-142.
[9] . 时间流逝感:概念探索、问卷编制及其信效度研究[J]. 心理技术与应用, 2017, 5(9): 542-552.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
[1] 刘洋, 刘筱萌, 李爽怡, 万造君, 苑媛. 家长式领导对工作满意度的影响:上下级关系的中介作用[J]. 心理技术与应用, 2018, 6(9): 513 -521 .
[2] 韩 璞, 张 凤, 雷秀雅. 不同自我权力感知儿童的学校动力绘画特征[J]. 心理技术与应用, 2018, 6(9): 522 -527 .
[3] 林 桐, 王 娟. 基于视觉情境范式的口语词汇理解研究进展[J]. 心理技术与应用, 2018, 6(9): 570 -576 .
[4] 辛自强, 张红川, 孙铃, 于泳红, 辛志勇. 财经素养的内涵与三元结构[J]. 心理技术与应用, 2018, 6(8): 450 -458 .
[5] 张晶晶, 余真真, 田 浩. 亲环境行为的情理整合模型:生态情感卷入的作用[J]. 心理技术与应用, 2018, 6(8): 484 -492 .
[6] 余习德, 鲁 成, 高定国. 时间流逝感与时间观、人格之间的关系研究[J]. 心理技术与应用, 2018, 6(8): 493 -502 .
[7] 陈必忠. 社交网站积极自我呈现与主观幸福感:多重中介模型[J]. 心理技术与应用, 2018, 6(9): 528 -536 .
[8] 寇彧. 亲社会心态培育是社会心理服务的重要内容[J]. 心理技术与应用, 2018, 6(10): 595 .
[9] 张林. 积极老龄化视角下老年心理服务体系建设的研究与实践[J]. 心理技术与应用, 2018, 6(10): 597 -598 .
[10] 辛自强, 许燕. “社会心理服务的实践与研究”专题简介[J]. 心理技术与应用, 2018, 6(10): 577 -578 .