期刊文献+

参照性交流与个人学习者学习成绩和选择性注意的比较

Comparison of the Learning Scores and Selective Attention between Referential Communicators and Individual Learner
下载PDF
导出
摘要 研究设计虚拟学习材料,通过功能预测学习任务和维度选择任务,探查参照性交流与个人学习者学习差异特点。结果表明:学习材料关系复杂性较低条件下,参照高分组block10成绩极其显著高于低分组和个人组;关系复杂性较高和高条件下,参照高分组和个人组均显著高于低分组;参照高分组和低分组间被试揭开维度平均数的相对量无显著差异,均极其显著高于个人组,且不受学习材料关系复杂性变化的影响。结果发现:不同复杂性材料下学习者间学习效果差异不同,但参照性交流学习者选择性注意水平一致高于个人学习者。 The study designed three kinds of experimental materials. Through the functional prediction task and dimension selection task, it explored the differences of learning scores and selective attention between individual learning and referential communication learning. The results showed that: Under the condition of the lower relational complexity, the scores of the high-score group were significantly higher than those of the low-score group and individual group. Under the condition of the higher and highest relational complexity, the scores of the high-score group and individual group were significantly higher than those of the low-score group. The relativity of dimensional number between the high-score group with the low-score group had no significantly difference. The relativity of the referential communicators was significantly higher than the individual learner. The differences in dimension selection task were not affected by learning materials. The results suggested that: Under the condition of the different relational complexity, the differences of learning scores were different. Under the condition of the different relational complexity, the levels of selective attention of the referential communicators were significantly higher than the level of individual learners.
出处 《心理研究》 2015年第5期32-39,共8页 Psychological Research
基金 天津市教育科学十二五规划重点课题(HE2014)
关键词 参照性交流 学习 选择性注意 referential communication learning selective attention
  • 相关文献

参考文献35

  • 1张恒超.参照性交流双方学习过程与选择性注意的比较[J].心理发展与教育,2014,30(1):55-60. 被引量:8
  • 2Araban S, Zainalipour H, Saadi R H R, et al. Study of cooperative learning effects on self-efficacy and a- cademic achievement in English lesson of high school students. Journal of Basic and Applied Scientific Re- search, 2012, 2(9): 8524-8526.
  • 3Bezuidenhout A. Perspective taking in conversation: A defense of speaker non-egocentricity. Journal of Prag- matics, 2013, 48(1): 4-16.
  • 4Btigels S, Schriefers H, Vonk W, et al. Pitch accents in context: How listeners process accentuation in ref- erential communication. Neuropsychologia, 2011, 49 : 2022-2036.
  • 5Holler J, Wilkin K. Co-Speech gesture mimicry in the process of collaborative referring during Face-to-Face dialogue. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 2011, 35 (2): 133-153.
  • 6Wagner M, Watson D G. Experimental and theoretical advances in prosody: A review. Language and Cogni- tive Processes, 2010, 25(7): 905-945.
  • 7Krauss R M, Weinheimer S. Changes in reference phrases as a function of frequency of usage in social interaction: A preliminary study. Psychonomic Science, 1964, 1: 113-114.
  • 8Markman A B, Makin V S. Referential communication and category acquisition. Journal of Experimental Psy- chology: General, 1998, 127(4): 331-354.
  • 9Heller D, Gorman K S, Tanenhaus M K. To name or to describe: Shared knowledge affects referential form. Topics in Cognitive Science, 2012, 4(2): 290-305.
  • 10Kronmiiller E, Barr D J. Perspective free pragmatics: Broken precedents and the recovery from preemption hypothesis. Journal of Memory and Language, 2007, 56(3) : 436-455.

二级参考文献280

共引文献121

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部