A psychophysiological examination of cognitive processing of and affective responses to social expectancy violations

A psychophysiological examination of cognitive processing of and affective responses to social expectancy violations
复制标题

DOI:
10.1111/1467-9280.00336
复制
发表时间:
2001-05-01
影响因子:
8.2
通讯作者:
Bettencourt, BA
Bettencourt, BA
中科院分区:
心理学1区
文献类型:
--
作者:
Bartholow, BD;Fabiani, M;Bettencourt, BA

文献摘要

被引文献

相似文献

人类感知的几种模型认为,违反预期会对感知者产生情感和认知后果。尽管现有证据普遍支持这些主张,但自我报告测量的时间解决方案限制了研究人员将潜在的生理过程与观察到的结果令人信服地联系起来的能力。在这项研究中,我们通过测量大脑(与事件相关的脑电位)和外周(面部肌电图)电生理活动来检查这些问题,同时参与者阅读关于虚构人物的积极和消极预期一致、违反预期、预期无关和语义不一致的行为句子。肌电图结果表明,负面(但不是正面)违反期望的行为早在刺激后 100 至 300 毫秒就会引发负面影响增强。事件相关电位表现出增强的积极性,响应违反预期和消极行为的延迟超过 300 毫秒。语义不一致的句子结尾影响了一个单独的负面成分(N400),表明语义和行为一致性处理之间存在根本差异。这种差异在参与者的回忆中也很明显。讨论了预期违背理论模型的含义。
Several models of person perception that expectancy violations have both affective and cognitive consequences for the perceiver. Although extant evidence generally supports these claims, the temporal solution of self-report measures has limited researcher's ability to convincingly link underlying physiological processes with observed outcomes. In this study, we examined these issues by measuring brain (event-related brain potentials) and peripheral (facial electromyogram) electrophysiological activity while participants read positive and negative expectancy-consistent, expectancy-violating, expectancy-irrelevant, and semantically incongruent behavioral sentences about fictitious characters. The electromyogram results indicated that negative (but not positive) expectancy-violating behaviors elicited enhanced negative affect as early as 100 to 300 ms poststimulus. The event-related potentials showed enhanced positivities with latency exceeding 300 ms in response to expectancy violations and negative behaviors. Semantically incongruent sentence endings influenced a separate negative component (N400) suggesting fundamental differences between semantic- and behavior-consistency processing. This difference also was evident in participants' recall. Implications for theoretical models of expectancy violation are discussed.