Studies of Psychology and Behavior

Studies of Psychology and Behavior ›› 2014, Vol. 12 ›› Issue (2): 151-155.

• Orignal Article • Previous Articles     Next Articles

The Inhibitory Mechanism of Individuals with Different Scientific Creativity

Bai Xuejun1,Gong Yanbin1,Hu Weiping2,Han Qing3,Yao Haijun1,4   

  1. 1 Academy of Psychology and Behavior, Tianjin Normal University, Tianjin 300074;
    2 Center for the Development of Teacher Professional Ability, Shanxi Normal University, Xian 710062;
    3 Institute of Educational Science, Shanxi Normal University, Linfen 041004;
    4 Department of psychology at School of law, Tianjin University of Commerce, Tianjin 300134
  • Received:2013-09-22 Online:2014-10-24 Published:2014-03-20

不同科学创造力个体干扰抑制机制的比较*

白学军1，巩彦斌1，胡卫平，2，韩琴3，姚海娟1，4   

  1. 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
  • 通讯作者: 巩彦斌，男，天津师范大学心理与行为研究院博士生。E-mail:gongyanbin525@126.com。
  • 作者简介:白学军，男，天津师范大学心理与行为研究院教授，博士生导师。
  • 基金资助:
    本研究得到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和天津市教育科学“十二五”规划课题(CE3011)的资助。

PDF (PC)

Abstract: Using the Scientific Creativity Test for Adolescent (SCTA), 20 participants in high Scientific Creativity group and the matched 20 participants in low Scientific Creativity group were selected. Stroop interference paradigm was 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 incongruent condition, the reaction time of high Scientific Creativity group is not significantly higher than the low Scientific Creativity group. In short, the findings suggested that high Scientific Creativity group had more efficient inhibition mechanism.

Key words: scientific creativity, Stroop Task, interference effect, inhibitory mechanism

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。

关键词: 科学创造力, Stroop任务, 干扰效应, 抑制机制

CLC Number: