成人期后形式思维的发展与机制

发布时间：2018-03-13 18:05

本文选题：形式运算思维　切入点：后形式思维　出处：《华东师范大学》2017年博士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：毕生发展观认为,认知的发展是贯穿个体一生的过程。进入到成人期以后,个体的认知思维发展并没有出现停滞或衰退,而是产生了一种超越于形式运算思维之上的新质思维,即后形式思维。后形式思维个体能够意识到知识具有相对性,而非绝对性;能够接受矛盾的普遍性;能够用辩证的思想整合矛盾的想法、情感和自我经验;善于发现问题,能够具体问题具体分析,并能够根据变化的情境产生新的解决问题的原则。在成年期,个体面临的问题多为条件和答案均不明确的模糊问题或结构不良问题,特别是情绪和人际冲突问题,这时用遵循逻辑规则的形式运算来解释成人个体的思维活动便表现出了较大的局限性,而后形式思维能够恰当描述和解释成人时期的复杂思维发展状况。但是,后形式思维与青少年时期的形式运算思维是否有质的差别,后形式思维是否位于形式运算思维之上,这些问题仍存在争议。其次,一些成人认知发展理论认为,后形式思维是成年个体通过解决日常复杂的情绪、人际冲突等问题,逐渐实现认知、情绪和自我的整合而发展起来的,但认知、情绪和自我如何在人际冲突等问题中相互作用实现整合,这尚缺乏实验研究。鉴于以上这些问题,本研究采用测验法、实验法和认知神经科学技术fMRI对后形式思维的发展及其机制进行了系统研究,共包括三个研究六个实验。研究—采用社会典型信念量表(SPBI)量表考察了后形式思维的年龄趋势和在性别等变量上的差异。结果显示:(])后形式思维在青少年后期开始发展,并在成年早、中期持续发展,但在成年后期(60岁以后)开始下降;不同年龄人群隶属于形式运算思维和后形式思维的人数存在显著差异。(2)形式运算思维和后形式思维得分没有显著的性别差异;隶属于两种思维的男、女人数也没有显著差异。(3)形式运算思维和后形式思维得分在教育水平上没有显著差异;不同教育水平的被试隶属于两种思维的人数也没有显著差异。(4)工作年限对后形式思维有影响。工作年限为20～29年的被试后形式思维得分最高。不同工作年限的被试隶属于形式运算思维和后形式思维的人数有显著差异。研究二分别采用人际冲突问题情境考察了认知、情绪因素的交互作用(实验2)、认知、自我因素的交互作用(实验3)和认知、情绪、自我三个因素的交互作用(实验4)。结果显示:(1)情绪主导、思维阶段两个变量交互作用影响个体的问题解决得分。在弱情绪主导情境下,形式运算思维和后形式思维个体的问题解决得分没有显著差异;在强情绪主导情境下,后形式思维个体问题解决得分显著高于形式运算思维个体。后形式思维个体在强、弱情绪主导情境下问题解决的得分没有显著差异。(2)自我卷入、思维阶段两个变量的交互作用对个体的问题解决得分不存在显著影响。(3)思维阶段、自我卷入和情绪诱导三个变量交互作用共同影响个体的问题解决。在消极图片诱导条件下,高自我卷入的后形式思维个体得分显著高于形式运算思维个体,而低自我卷入的两种思维个体的问题解决得分没有显著差异。研究三比较了形式运算思维和后形式思维在人物框架和事物框架两种条件推理材料下的行为差异(实验5)和脑激活区域差异(实验6)。结果显示:(1)不同思维阶段个体在人物题和事物题上的正确率有显著差异。形式运算思维个体人物题的正确率显著低于后形式思维个体,而事物题的正确率显著高于后形式思维个体。(2)在两种条件推理题目上,后形式思维个体都表现出比形式运算思维个体更强的激活,而形式运算思维个体不存在比后形式思维个体更强的激活脑区。相对于形式运算思维个体,在进行事物题推理时,后形式思维个体更多的激活了体现"反省心智"的内侧前额叶部分区域,并表现出明显的左半球优势。在进行人物题推理时,后形式思维个体也更多激活了体现"反省心智"的眶部额回和体现"自主心智"的后扣带回。研究结果验证了三重加工模型。综合三个研究的结果,我们得出结论,后形式思维是在形式运算思维之后发展起来的思维方式,它高于形式运算思维,二者之间有着质的差别。
[Abstract]:According to the view of lifelong development, cognitive development is through the process of individual life. After entering adulthood, individual cognitive development and not stagnation or recession, but a new thinking on the matter beyond the formal operation thinking, namely after the form of thinking. After thinking individuals can realize knowledge relative, rather than absolute universality; accept contradiction; to integrate conflicting thoughts with dialectical thoughts, feelings and self experience; good at finding problems, to analyze specific issues, and to solve the problem according to the change of the new situation. In adulthood, individual problems for conditions and answers are not clear or fuzzy problems of ill structured problems, especially the emotional and interpersonal conflicts, then follow the logical rules of formal operation to explain adult thinking activities Show the limitations, and then thinking can properly describe and explain the form of complex thinking development in adult period. However, after the formal thinking and adolescent formal operation thinking whether there is a qualitative difference, whether in the form of thinking after the formal operation thinking on these issues is still controversial. Secondly, some adults think the theory of cognitive development, after the form of thinking is the adult individual by solving complex problems of daily mood, interpersonal conflict, gradually realize the integration of emotional and cognitive, but cognitive self developed, emotional and self, how the interpersonal conflict in the interaction to achieve integration, this is still a lack of experimental research. In view of these in this study, the method of test, experimental method and cognitive neuroscience technology fMRI on the form of thinking development and its mechanism were studied, including a total of three. The six experimental research. Using the typical social belief scale (SPBI) scale differences in age trends were investigated and the form of thinking in gender and other variables. The results showed that: (]) after the form of thinking in the late teens began to develop, and in the early mid adult, sustainable development, but in late adulthood (after the age of 60) began to decline; different age groups belong to formal operation thinking after the number and form of thinking there are significant differences. (2) after the formal operation thinking and thinking score no significant gender differences; belonging to two kinds of thinking men, there are no significant differences. The number of female (3) and formal operation thinking after scoring form of thinking in the education level had no significant difference; different education levels were also no significant difference in the number of belonging to two kinds of thinking. (4) affect the working life of the form of thinking. After 20~29 years of work experience of the subjects after Thinking the highest score. Different working years number of subjects belonging to the form of thinking and thinking after the formal operation has significant difference. Two respectively by using the situation of interpersonal problem investigated cognitive interaction, emotional factors (Experiment 2), cognitive interaction, self factors (Experiment 3) and cognitive, emotional. The self interaction of three factors (Experiment 4). The results showed: (1) the dominant mood, individual influence thinking stage of two variables to solve the score. In the weak dominant emotional situation, there is no significant difference between the scores of problem solving thinking of individual thinking and operation form; leading situation in strong emotion after the problem, individual form thinking to solve the score is significantly higher than that of formal operation thinking individuals. After thinking individuals in strong, weak emotional situations lead to solve problems were no significant differences. (2) self involvement, thinking The problem of interaction of the two variables on the individual stage of settling the score was not significantly affected. (3) the stage of thinking, self involvement and emotional interaction induced by the three variables influencing the individual problem solving. Inducing conditions in the negative pictures, after the form of high personal involvement thinking individuals scored significantly higher than the individual formal operation thinking there was no significant difference between the scores, and two individual self thinking involved problem. Study three compares the behavior in the form of thinking in the characters and things framework framework of the two kinds of conditional reasoning materials under the formal operation thinking and difference (Experiment 5) and regional brain activation differences (Experiment 6). The results showed: (1) there are significant differences between different stages of individual characters in thinking the correct rate of questions and things on the issue. The correct rate of formal operation thinking individual character problem was significantly lower than that after individual form of thinking, and the rate of correct things explicit questions After the above form of thinking individual. (2) in the two kinds of conditional reasoning problem, after thinking individual performance than the formal operation thinking individual stronger activation, and formal operation thinking there is no individual brain activation patterns of thinking more than individual. Compared with the formal operation thinking individuals, inferences in things when, after thinking of individual more activation in the medial prefrontal region reflects the "reflective mind", and shows obvious advantage in the left hemisphere. In the figure reasoning problem, after thinking of "more active individual orbital frontal reflective mind" back and reflect the "autonomous mental". Back. Results of three comprehensive processing model. The results of three studies, we conclude that after the form of thinking is developed after the formal operation thinking, it is higher than the formal operation thinking, two There is a qualitative difference between them.

【学位授予单位】：华东师范大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：B842.5

【参考文献】