【作者】 张石磊；

【导师】 苗丹民；

【作者基本信息】 第四军医大学 ， 应用心理学， 2013， 博士

【摘要】 一直以来，心理学家们认为人类的认知过程是客观的、静态的，并且与动机过程完全分离，不受主观的影响。然而，随着动机化认知研究取向的方兴未艾，越来越多的研究者开始关注动机如何影响认知。因此，记忆作为认知活动基石，不可避免的受到动机的影响。其中，特别是错误记忆的个体差异研究较少涉及动机因素。调节焦点理论作为二十一世纪新兴的动机理论，区分了预防型焦点和促进型焦点两种动机类型。由于两种调节焦点类型信息加工方式存在差异，可能造成这两类个体错误记忆的差异。因此，本研究试图验证特质型和状态型调节焦点在DRM(Deese–Roediger–McDermott)范式下错误记忆的差异，并尝试探寻动机视角下错误记忆差异的机制。研究一采用DRM范式的变式，采用量表区分长期特质调节焦点类型，该部分的实验一和实验二分别考察了促进型焦点和预防型焦点个体的错误回忆和错误再认。结果显示，特质预防型焦点个体的错误回忆率和错误再认率都显著高于特质促进型焦点个体。研究二的两个实验采用DRM范式的变式，并以启动法考察了启动的状态型预防型焦点和促进型焦点个体的错误回忆和错误再认，对研究一的结果进行重复验证。结果显示，启动预防型焦点个体的错误回忆率显著低于启动促进型焦点个体，启动预防型焦点个体的错误再认率显著低于启动促进型焦点个体。研究三进一步探求两种调节焦点类型的错误记忆差异机制，在测量错误记忆时引入两种调节焦点的加工方式作为记忆指标，验证了促进型焦点的个体倾向于采用项目关联型加工，预防型焦点的个体倾向于采用项目独特型加工的研究假设。研究三通过直接测量两种调节焦点类型的项目独特型加工和项目关联型加工的程度，证实了两种调节焦点错误记忆差异是由动机诱发不同加工方式造成的。最后，本文对动机状态的启动、加工方式和错误记忆三者之间的关系进行讨论，并从动机化的认知视角对本研究进行了总结，同时指出了研究的局限，并提出该领域未来研究的方向。更多还原

【Abstract】 Psychologists have long hypothesized that the human cognition is static and lessinfluenced by the groundings. Since the emergence of the―motivated cognition‖approach,there is an increasing number of researchers who focus on how the cognition is colored bymotivation. As the foundation of the cognition, memory is inevitably influenced by themotivation. Specially, the Regulatory Focus Theory is a newly developing motivationtheory, which disguished between two motivation orientation, the promotion focus and theprevention focus. Due to the difference of information processing style, these twomotivational orientations might lead to the different results in fasle memory. Thus, thisstudy aims to explore how the promotion focus and prevention focus may lead to differentresult in false memory, and shed light on this phenomenon.Research one adopted the modified DRM (Deese–Roediger–McDermott) paradigm.By using the scale to distinguish two motivation orientations, study one and study twotested the false recall and false recognition of promotion focus and prevention focus ones, respectively. The results showed that the promotion focus ones had a higher false recallrate and false recognition rate than prevention focus ones. Research two sought toreplicate the findings by conducting a modified DRM paradigm and explored the influenceof situational manipulated regulatory focus states on false memories. The results showedthat the promotion focus prime caused more critical lure hitting and veridical memory inboth recall and recognition task than the prevention focus prime. Research three aimed toexplore the mechanism on the difference effect of regulatory focus prime on the falsememory. Results showed that the relational and item specific processing style used bypromotion focus and prevention focus lead to this difference. This provide the directevidence that the motivation may exert influence on cognition by influence the processingstyle.Finally, the implications for how approach and avoidance motivation affected falsememory by processing style were discussed. Also, the author summarized the study in theperspective of motivated cognition, and pointed out the limitation and future direction ofthe research.更多还原