心理技术与应用 ›› 2017, Vol. 5 ›› Issue (10): 619-627.doi: 10.16842/j.cnki.issn2095-5588.2017.10.006

• • 上一篇    下一篇

不同交流情境下参照性交流双方学习的比较

张恒超   

  1. (天津商业大学法学院心理学系, 天津300134)
  • 出版日期:2017-10-01 发布日期:2017-10-01

The Comparison of Referential Communication Learning between Two Sides under Different Communication Situations

ZHANG Hengchao   

  1. (Department of Psychology, School of Law, Tianjin University of Commerce, Tianjin 300134, China)
  • Online:2017-10-01 Published:2017-10-01

摘要: 研究采用参照性交流范式,比较不同共享条件下参照性交流双方的学习特点。结果显示:低分组条件下,共享语言+对象+表情方式下学习成绩极其显著高于其余方式,共享语言方式显著高于共享语言+对象方式,共享语言+对象+表情方式下高、低分组间无显著差异;共享语言方式下被试揭开的有关维度数量显著多于其余方式,共享语言+对象+表情方式显著多于共享语言+对象方式;共享语言+对象方式下被试揭开的无关维度数量显著多于其余方式,高分组显著少于低分组。结果表明:共享方式间学习成绩差异仅表现于低分组,共享表情促进学习效果,共享对象降低学习效果;共享语言+对象+表情方式下交流双方认知与行为协调水平更高;共享语言方式下被试选择性注意指向性水平最高,共享语言+对象方式下被试选择性注意集中性水平最低。

关键词: 参照性交流;共享条件;学习

Abstract: The study used referential communication paradigm to compare the learning characteristics of both sides of the referential communication under different shared conditions. The results showed that: Under the condition of low score group, the score in the shared language + object + expression condition was significantly higher than the other conditions. The shared language condition was significantly higher than the shared language + object condition. There was no significant difference between high and low groups in the shared language + object + expression condition. The number of relative dimension in the shared language condition was significantly more than the other conditions, the shared language + object + expressions condition was significantly more than the shared language + object condition. The number of irrelevant dimension in the shared language + object condition was significantly more than the other conditions. The high score group was significantly less than the low group. The results suggested that: The score difference among the shared conditions only appeared in the low group. Shared expression promoted learning effect, and shared object reduced learning effect. The levels of cognitive and behavioral coordination between both sides were higher in the shared language + object + expression condition. The level of the directivity of selective attention was the highest in the shared language condition, and the level of the concentration of selective attention was the lowest in the shared language + object condition.

Key words: referential communication; shared condition; learning

中图分类号: 

  • B842.3
[1] 于鑫悦, 阴梦岩, 赵亚飞, 辛素飞. 中国大学生学习倦怠变迁的横断历史研究[J]. 心理技术与应用, 2020, 8(2): 74-83.
[2] 袁 媛. 执行功能在创造性顿悟中的作用[J]. 心理技术与应用, 2019, 7(9): 565-572.
[3] 王景玉, 曲可佳, . 学习判断中的线索整合及其有效性[J]. 心理技术与应用, 2019, 7(7): 433-440.
[4] 胡锦慧, 辛 聪, 陈幼贞. 编码方式和线索显著性对前瞻记忆的影响[J]. 心理技术与应用, 2018, 6(9): 537-542.
[5] . 英语词对难度和学习方式对回忆准确性的影响[J]. 心理技术与应用, 2018, 6(2): 73-78.
[6] . 何种情绪更有利于大学生运动员的工作记忆:来自心率变异性的证据[J]. 心理技术与应用, 2017, 5(9): 513-520.
[7] . 专业认同对学习投入的影响:一个多重中介模型[J]. 心理技术与应用, 2017, 5(9): 536-541.
[8] . 心理学视域下的网络非理性消费行为探析[J]. 心理技术与应用, 2017, 5(5): 308-317.
[9] . 大学生自主学习策略对学习绩效的影响:学习动机的调节作用[J]. 心理技术与应用, 2017, 5(2): 89-98.
[10] . 大学生自我控制能力对学业拖延的影响:有调节的中介效应[J]. 心理技术与应用, 2016, 4(4): 209-214.
[11] . 老化悖论——注意和记忆中的积极效应 [J]. 心理技术与应用, 2016, 4(2): 92-96.
[12] . 五种角色自主学习: 一种组织讨论的技术[J]. 心理技术与应用, 2016, 4(1): 1-7.
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 .