提取方式影响延迟学习判断的ERP证据
发布时间：2019-04-19 22:41
【摘要】：学习判断(judgments of learning,JOLs)是个体对学习材料在测试中能否正确回忆的预测,是元记忆监测的一种形式。Nelson和Dunlosky(1991)的研究发现,和即时学习判断相比,延迟学习判断的相对准确性较高,研究者将这种现象称为延迟学习判断效应(delayed JOL effect)。由于其在教育中的重要应用,延迟学习判断受到心理学家的广泛关注,从不同角度提出各种理论试图解释延迟学习判断效应,但是并没有取得一致性结论,并且对于延迟学习判断的认知加工过程却较少涉猎。本研究通过两个实验探究了延迟学习判断的认知机制。实验一通过限定学习判断时间论证提取对延迟学习判断的影响,结果却发现虽然和非快速学习判断组相比,快速学习判断组的反应时降低,但是并没有改变判断等级和再认成绩,说明快速学习判断并没有改变延迟学习判断的提取方式或判断过程;实验二通过使用高时间分辨率的事件相关电位(Event-Related Potentials,ERPs)技术进一步探究延迟学习判断不同等级的认知神经机制,发现高低等级的学习判断存在着400-600ms早期新旧效应和800-1200ms晚期右侧额区新旧效应。这说明延迟学习判断包含不止一个加工过程,早期新旧效应反映了线索再认的过程,晚期右侧额中区效应则反映了对提取之后的评估过程。
[Abstract]:Learning judgment (judgments of learning,JOLs) is an individual's prediction of whether or not the learning material can be recalled correctly in the test, and is a form of meta-memory monitoring. Nelson and Dunlosky (1991) found that compared with instant learning judgment, The relative accuracy of delayed learning judgment is higher than that of delayed learning judgment. The researchers call this phenomenon the delayed learning judgment effect (delayed JOL effect). Because of its important application in education, delayed learning judgment has been widely concerned by psychologists. Various theories have been put forward from different angles to explain the effect of delayed learning judgment, but no consistent conclusion has been reached. And the cognitive process of delayed learning judgment is less dabble. This study explores the cognitive mechanism of delayed learning judgment through two experiments. In the first experiment, the effect of extraction on delayed learning judgment was demonstrated by limiting the time of learning judgment. The results showed that although the response time of fast learning judgment group was lower than that of non-fast learning judgment group, the response time of fast learning judgment group was decreased. However, there is no change in judgment level and recognition score, which indicates that fast learning judgment has not changed the way of extracting delayed learning judgment or the process of judgment. In experiment 2, we further explored the cognitive neural mechanisms of different levels of delayed learning by using high-time-resolution event-related potential (Event-Related Potentials,ERPs) techniques. It was found that there were new and old effects in the early stage of 400-600ms and the new and old effects in the right frontal area in the late stage of 800-1200ms. This indicates that delayed learning judgment involves more than one processing process, the new and old effects reflect the process of clue recognition in the early stage, and the mid-frontal effect in the late stage reflects the evaluation process after extraction.
【学位授予单位】：济南大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：B842.3
本文编号：2461354
[Abstract]:Learning judgment (judgments of learning,JOLs) is an individual's prediction of whether or not the learning material can be recalled correctly in the test, and is a form of meta-memory monitoring. Nelson and Dunlosky (1991) found that compared with instant learning judgment, The relative accuracy of delayed learning judgment is higher than that of delayed learning judgment. The researchers call this phenomenon the delayed learning judgment effect (delayed JOL effect). Because of its important application in education, delayed learning judgment has been widely concerned by psychologists. Various theories have been put forward from different angles to explain the effect of delayed learning judgment, but no consistent conclusion has been reached. And the cognitive process of delayed learning judgment is less dabble. This study explores the cognitive mechanism of delayed learning judgment through two experiments. In the first experiment, the effect of extraction on delayed learning judgment was demonstrated by limiting the time of learning judgment. The results showed that although the response time of fast learning judgment group was lower than that of non-fast learning judgment group, the response time of fast learning judgment group was decreased. However, there is no change in judgment level and recognition score, which indicates that fast learning judgment has not changed the way of extracting delayed learning judgment or the process of judgment. In experiment 2, we further explored the cognitive neural mechanisms of different levels of delayed learning by using high-time-resolution event-related potential (Event-Related Potentials,ERPs) techniques. It was found that there were new and old effects in the early stage of 400-600ms and the new and old effects in the right frontal area in the late stage of 800-1200ms. This indicates that delayed learning judgment involves more than one processing process, the new and old effects reflect the process of clue recognition in the early stage, and the mid-frontal effect in the late stage reflects the evaluation process after extraction.
【学位授予单位】：济南大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：B842.3
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前3条
1 贾宁;;延迟学习判断研究的发展与展望[J];心理科学;2012年01期
2 陈功香;张承芬;苏雅雯;;延迟学习判断的效应机制[J];心理学报;2010年07期
3 陈功香,傅小兰;学习判断及其准确性[J];心理科学进展;2004年02期
，本文编号：2461354
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/shekelunwen/xinlixingwei/2461354.html
