不同科学创造力个体干扰抑制机制的比较  

The Inhibitory Mechanism of Individuals with Different Scientific Creativity

作　　者：白学军[1] 巩彦斌[1] 胡卫平[2] 韩琴[3] 姚海娟[1,4] 

机构地区：[1]天津师范大学心理与行为研究院,天津300074 [2]陕西师范大学教师专业能力发展中心,西安710062 [3]山西师范大学教育科学研究院,临汾041004 [4]天津商业大学法学院心理学系,天津300134

出　　处：《心理与行为研究》2014年第2期151-155,共5页Studies of Psychology and Behavior

基　　金：教育部人文社会科学重点研究基地重大项目(08JJDXLX266);天津市高等学校创新团队培养计划;天津市教育科学"十二五"规划课题(CE3011)的资助

摘　　要：选取《科学创造力量表》筛选出高、低科学创造力个体各20名,通过完成经典Stroop色字干扰抑制任务,探讨高、低科学创造力的个体抑制机制的差异。结果发现:在Stroop色字任务上,无论是高科学创造力组还是低科学创造力组,都出现了Stroop干扰效应,但低科学创造力组的Stroop效应更明显;高科学创造力组在字色不一致条件下的错误率显著低于低科学创造力组,但是两组被试在Stroop任务反应时上差异不显著。本研究结果提示高科学创造力个体的认知抑制能力强于低科学创造力个体。used to investigate the differences of the inhibitory mechanism between the high Scientific Creativity group and the low Scientific Creativity group. The results showed： 1 ） In the Stroop task, the Stroop effect are respectively found in both high Scientific Creativity group and low Scientific Creativity group. But Stroop interference effect was more significant in low Scientific Creativity group. 2） In incongruent condition, the false rate of high Scientific Creativity group is fewer significant than low Scientific Creativity group. In addition, whether in congruent condition or in in- congruent condition, the reaction time of high Scientific Creativity group is not significantly higher than the low Sci- entific Creativity group. In short, the findings suggested that high Scientific Creativity group had more efficient inhi- bition mechanism.

关 键 词：科学创造力 STROOP任务 干扰效应 抑制机制. 

分 类 号：B842.1[哲学宗教—基础心理学]