实验者在场对儿童学习效果的影响

doi:10.19988/j.cnki.issn.2095-1159.2022.04.006

心理研究

2022, Vol. 15

Issue (4): 318-327 DOI: 10.19988/j.cnki.issn.2095-1159.2022.04.006

基础研究

本期目录 | 过刊浏览 | 高级检索

实验者在场对儿童学习效果的影响

周丹丹, 郭云飞, 李永鑫

河南大学心理学院,开封 475004

The effect of experimenter presence on children’s learning

ZHOU Dandan, GUO Yunfei, LI Yongxin

School of Psychology, Faculty of Education, Henan University, Kaifeng 475004

摘要
图/表
参考文献
相关文章 (0)

全文: PDF (982 KB) HTML (0 KB)
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

摘要本研究以一至六年级儿童为研究对象,探讨了实验研究过程中实验者在场对儿童学习效果的影响。研究发现：（1）实验者在场确实影响了儿童的行为表现,促使儿童牺牲更多时间以确保任务判断的正确性;（2）实验者性别也是影响儿童学习效果的关键因素,主要体现在女性实验者陪同时儿童行为的显著变化。结果表明,实验者在场可能激励了儿童扮演“好被试”“好学生”,启发未来关于儿童的实验研究,应重视实验者在场的影响。

	服务

	把本文推荐给朋友
	加入我的书架
	加入引用管理器
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	作者相关文章
	周丹丹
	郭云飞
	李永鑫

关键词 ：实验者在场, 儿童, 学习效果, 好被试, 实验者效应

基金资助:河南省教育科学“十四五”规划2021年度一般课题（2021YB0047）

通讯作者: 周丹丹,女,2020年至今在河南大学心理学科任教,讲师,博士。Email:zhoudandan666@henu.edu.cn
郭云飞,男,2020年至今在河南大学心理学科从事博士后研究工作。Email:gyfhenu@126.com
李永鑫,男,1993~1997年在河南大学心理学科攻读学士学位,1997~2000年在河南大学心理学科攻读硕士学位,2000年至今在河南大学心理学科任教,教授,博士生导师。Email:liyongxin@henu.edu.cn

引用本文:

周丹丹, 郭云飞, 李永鑫. 实验者在场对儿童学习效果的影响[J]. 心理研究, 2022, 15(4): 318-327.
ZHOU Dandan, GUO Yunfei, LI Yongxin. The effect of experimenter presence on children’s learning. Psychological Research, 2022, 15(4): 318-327.

链接本文:

http://xlyj.magtech.com.cn/CN/10.19988/j.cnki.issn.2095-1159.2022.04.006 或 http://xlyj.magtech.com.cn/CN/Y2022/V15/I4/318

[1] 敖俊梅, 林玲. (2020). 中小学教师性别结构“女性化”的现状、成因与对策.民族教育研究, 31(2), 54-62.
[2] 郭秀艳, 杨治良. (2004). 实验心理学. 北京: 人民教育出版社.
[3] 金盛华, 张杰. (1995). 当代社会心理学导论. 北京: 北京师范大学出版社.
[4] 李朝旭, 莫雷. (2004). 对性别助长假设的初步验证: 在场观众的性别影响作业效绩吗?心理科学, 27(06), 1400-1403.
[5] 李季. (1990). 开放环境下青少年交往与性意识发展的调查研究.心理发展与教育, (1), 48-51.
[6] 李文辉, 洪胜男. (2022). 社会助长和性别助长对小学生冒险行为的影响.中国临床心理学志, 30(01), 13-17.
[7] 罗映宇, 孙锐, 王艺翔. (2021). 认知资源:解释社会助长效应的新视角.心理科学, 44(5), 1049-1056.
[8] 莫文. (2008).心理学实验中的各种效应及解决办法.实验科学与技术, 6(6), 118-121.
[9] 王梦琦. (2013). 浅谈心理测试中“观众效应”对被测人的影响.法制与社会, 2(上), 191-192.
[10] 吴捷. (2021). 教师性别比例失衡对师范生培养的启示.教育教学研究, 27(81), 79-82.
[11] 吴卫国,苏彦捷. (2008). 6~12岁小学生数字记忆广度的发展.宁波大学学报(教育科学版), 30(04), 62-67.
[12] 肖菲. (2020). 幼小衔接视角下一年级儿童学习适应性现状调查研究.陕西学前师范学院学报, 36(11), 75-81.
[13] 赵芳芳, 李晓彤, 唐光蓉. (2020). 小学各学段学生性别意识的调差研究.西北成人教育学院学报, 1(1), 105-109.
[14] Baron, R. S. (1986). Distraction-conflict theory: Progress and problems.Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 19, 1-40.
[15] Belletier, C., & Camos, V. (2018). Does the experimenter presence affect working memory?Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1424(1), 212-220.
[16] Belletier C.,K. Davranche,I. Tellier,et al. (2015). Choking under monitoring pressure: Being watched by the experimenter reduces executive attention.Psychonomic Bulletin Review, 22, 1410-1416.
[17] Berka C., Levendowski D. J., Lumicao M. N., Yau A., Davis G., Zivkovic V. T., Olmstead R. E., Tremoulet P. D., & Craven P. L. (2007). EEG correlates of task engagement and mental workload in vigilance, learning, and memory tasks.Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine, 78, B231-244.
[18] Bond, C. F., & Titus, L. J. (1983). Social facilitation: A meta-analysis of 241 studies.Psychological Bulletin, 94(2), 265-292.
[19] Brackett L., Reid D. H., & Green C. W. (2007). Effects of reactivity to observations on staff performance.Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 40(1), 191-195.
[20] Chapman C. D., Benedict C., & Schiöth H. B. (2018). Experimenter gender and replicability in science.Science Advances, 4(1), e1701427.
[21] Cottrell N. B., Wack D. L., Sekerak G. J., & Rittle R. H. (1968). Social facilitation of dominant responses by the presence of an audience and the mere presence of others.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9(3), 245-250.
[22] Guerin,B.(1986). Mere presence effects in humans: A review.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 22, 38-77.
[23] Jacobs, H. (1989). Reviewed work: Understanding social psychology by S. Worchel, J. Cooper, G. R. Goethals.Teaching Sociology, 17(1), 107-108.
[24] Klein O., Doyen S., Leys C., Magalhaes de Saldanha da Gama, P. A., Miller S., Questienne L., & Cleeremans A. (2012). Low hopes, high expectations: Expectancy effects and replicability of behavioral experiments. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, 572-584.
[25] Lebbon, A. R., & Austin, J. (2013). A preliminary examination of the effects of observer presence on work-related behavior in a simulated office.Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 33(3), 185-199.
[26] López-Vicente M, Forns J, Suades-González E, Esnaola M, García-Esteban R, álvarez-Pedrerol M, Júlvez J, Burgaleta M, Sebastián-Gallés N, Sunyer J. (2016). Development Trajectories in Primary School Children Using n-Bcak Task.Frontiers in Psychology 7, 716-727.
[27] Moore D. J., Keogh E., & Eccleston C. (2009). Identifying experimental methods to determine the effect of pain on attention: A review of pain, caffeine, alcohol and nicotine studie.Human Psychopharmacology, 24, 601-618.
[28] Mowery J. D., Miltenberger R. G., & Weil T. M. (2010). Evaluating the effects of reactivity to supervisor presence on staff response to tactile prompts and self-monitoring in a group home setting.Behavioral Interventions, 25, 21-35.
[29] Neider D. P., Fuse M., & Suri G. (2019). Cockroaches, performance, and an audience: Reexamining social facilitation 50 years later.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 85, 103851.
[30] Nichols, A. L., & Maner, J. K. (2008). The good-subject effect: Investigating participant demand characteristics.Journal of General Psychology, 132, 151-165.
[31] Orne, M. T. (1962). On the social psychology of the psychology experiment: With particular reference to demand characteristics and their implications.American Psychologist, 17, 776-783.
[32] Orne M. T.(2009). Demand characteristics and the concept of Quasicontrols. In R. Rosenthal & R. L. Rosnow (Eds.), Artifacts in behavioral research (pp. 110-137). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1969).
[33] Palmer, M. G., & Johnson, C. M. (2018). Experimenter presence in human behavior analytic laboratory studies: Confound it? Behavior Analysis Research and Practice, 19(4), 303-314.
[34] Rosenthal, R. (2009). Experimenter effects in behavioral research. In R. Rosenthal & R. L. Rosnow (Eds.), Artifacts in behavioral research (2nd ed., pp. 287-666). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1975).
[35] Ruddock H. K., Brunstrom J. M., Vartanian L. R., & Higgs S. (2019). A systematic review and meta-analysis of the social facilitation of eating.American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 110(4), 842-861.
[36] Sanders, G. S. (1981). Driven by distraction: An integrative review of social facilitation theory and research.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 17(3), 227-251.
[37] Weber, S. J., & Cook, T. D. (1972). Subject effects in laboratory research: An examination of subject roles, demand characteristics, and valid inference.Psychological Bulletin, 77, 273-295.
[38] Zajonc, R. B. (1965). Social facilitation: A solution is suggested for an old unresolved social psychological problem.Science, 149, 269-274.