2009 1 :100124918 (2009) 0120046253 :B84412 :A 3 ( 363000) : 550 75 Deese2Roediger2 McDermott (DRM ) : (1) DRM ; (2) ; (3) : ; ;DRM ; 1 Birenbaum Nasser [7 ] [1] Spielberger - [8 ] [2] [2-4] [9] [2] Deese2Roediger2 McDermott ( DRM) DRM Roediger McDermott Deese U Roediger McDermott 15 [2] Mcdonald [5] U U [10] DRM [6 ] DRM 3 : A (ZA08294S) :. E2mail : shunsen @1631com 46
: [10 ] [11] [10 21] 1 [22 ] DRM [21 ] Isen Labroo 212 [23 ] Ellis Ashbrook [18 ] [21 ] [24 ] U : [25 ] ; [18 ] 213 21311 550 [26 ] 52 66 63 89 45 23 7 12 2 45 [2 8 ] 77 21 15 45 1 15 17 DRM 21312 3 ( ) 3 ( ) 2 1 211 77 : [17 ] Π 21313 47
2009 1 C #! 21314 :Cassady 2002 ) 27 0191 214 ; 21411 0185 ; 253 45 0179 [1 6 ] 21315 DRM 10 12 t (44) = 26122 p < 0105 3 (0180 0116) 30 30 10 1 ( M SD) ;20 10 10 21412 3 ( 2 21316 1) : 2 ( M SD) : : 3 ( ) 2s ; 10 3 2s : 30 : Z P Z ; ( 1 t 0120 0116 0174 0118 0106 0109 0119 0119 0179 0117 0104 0107 0117 0114 0169 0119 0102 0104 0123 0113 0173 0116 0111 0112 P 1 48
: U Kluskal2Wallis 2 = 1188 p > 0105 Alpert Haber - 2 = 1198 p > 0105 2 [2 = 6129 p < 0105 ] MD = 0109 p < 0105 21413 ; - ; [27 ] 3 ( ms) ( M SD) ( M SD) ( M SD) 973152 190116 1073105 220107 998194 246122 891191 181190 1134155 265171 915115 217193 1206144 337156 1282118 360156 1249109 781115 3 [21 ] Kluskal2Wallis 2 = 11111 p < 0101 MD = 314153 MD = 232192 p < 0101 215 1 49
2009 1 3 2 311 1 0129 ( p < 0101) 0189 ( p < 0101) 31315 1 [2 ] 31316 30 : 2 30 30-312 31411 t ( 4) t (29) = 18145 p < U 2 : 01001 4 ( M SD) 313 31311 31412 15 ( 5 30 2) 30-2 1 1 10 Kluskal2Wallis ( 49 ) 10 ( 47 40 ) 10 ( 2 = 6174 p < 0105 37 ) 31312 5 3 ( ) 3 ( ) 0119 31313 1 31314 50 - (STAI) :Spielberger 1970 1988 20 1 314 0122 0116 0164 0118 0104 0108 ( M SD) 0113 0177 0120 0104 0105 0116 0111 0157 0115 0102 0106 0132 0119 0157 0110 0106 0111 31413 Kluskal2Wallis
: 1091174 264155 1024112 207187 1129110 298179 1124123 313186 1266127 376110 996117 218149 1129123 460147 1183167 465147 939159 242192 315 2 DRM Corson & Verrier [26 ] [18 ] [24 Storberck Clore ] [18 23 ] - [17 ] 2 ( 6) 6 ( ms) 4 3 U 2 DRM [17 ] U - ( ) 51
2009 1. 2006 29 (5) : 1186-1189. [1 ] [28 ] Hembree [3 ] 1 Cognition 2005 31 (1) : 76-851 Journal of Memory and Language 1996 35 : 212-2301 U 5 (1) [19 ] 2001 33 (1) :17-231 (2) [20 ]. ; : [2 ] Zeidner M. Test anxiety : The state of the art. New York Plenum Press 19981 [3 ] Hembree R. Correlates Causes effects and treatment of test anxiety. Review of Educational Research 1988 58 (1) :47-771 [ 4 ] Sullivan L. The effect of test anxiety on attention and memory skills in undergraduate students. Chrestomathy 2002 1 263-2731 [5 ] Mcdonald A. The prevalence and effects of test anxiety in school children. Educational Psychology. 2001 21 : 89-1011 [6 ].. 2006 12 (1) : 35-381 [7 ] Birenbaum M Nasser F. On the relationship between test anxiety and performance. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development 1994 27 : 293-301. [8 ] Cassady J C Johnson R E. Cognitive test anxiety and Academic Performance. Contemporary Educational Psychology 2002 27 : 270-2951 [ 9 ] Lindsay D S Johnson M K. False memories and the source monitoring framework : Reply to Reyna and Lloyd ( 1997). Learning and Individual Differences 2000 12 : 145-1611 [10 ] Watson J M Bunting M F Poole B J Conway A R. Individual differences in susceptibility to false memory in the Deese2Roediger2McDermott paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology : Learning Memory and [11 ].. 2004 27 (4) :909-9121 [12 ] Stadler M A Roediger H L Mcdermott K B. Norms for words lists that create false memories. Memory Cognition 1997 27 (3) : 494 - [1 ]. brand name on positive affect : implicit and explicit measures. Motivation and 52 5001 [13 ] McDermott K B. The persistence of false memorise in list recall. [14 ].. 1998 30 (4) :374-3791 [15 ].. : 20021 [16 ] Watson J M McDermott K B Balota D A. Attempting to avoid false memories in the Deese2Roediger2McDermott paradigm : Assessing the combined influence of practice and warnings in young and old adults. Memory and Cognition 2004 32 (1) : 135-1411 [17 ].. : 20061 [18 ].. 2004 27(3) : 691-6931 2001 3 (2) : 104-1101.. :. [21 ].. 2008 31 (3) : 571-5741 [22 ].. 2002 1 (4) : 118-1221 [23 ] Isen A M Labroo A A Durlach P. An influence of product and
: Emotion 2004 28 : 44-631 [24 ] Stoorbeck J & C1ore G L. With sadness comes accuracy : with happiness false memory : mood and the false memory effect. Psychological Science 2005 16(10) : 785-7911 [25 ] Sharkawy J E Groth K Vetter C. et al. False memories of emotional and neutral words. Behavioural Neurology 2008 19 (1-2) : 7-111 [ 26 ] Corson Y &Verrier N. Emotions and False Memories : Valence or Arousal? Psychological Science 2007 18(3) : 208-2111 [27 ].. : 2004 189-1941 [28 ].. 1996 24 (5) : 95-991 The Influence of Test Anxiety on False Memory CHEN Shun2sen TAN G Dan2hong ( Institute of Applied Psychology Zhangzhou Normal University Fujian Zhangzhou 363000 China) Abstract :The Cognitive Test Anxiety Scale was used to select 75 students as subjects with higher medium or lower test anxiety respectively from 550 students. Then the Deese2Roediger2McDermott (DRM) paradigm was used to evoke the subjects false memory to explore the influence of test anxiety on their false memory. The results showed that : (1) The DRM paradigm was effective in eliciting subjects false memory of non2presented lures ; (2) The medium test anxiety subjects false memory was least ; (3) The higher anxiety subjects false recognition in arousal situation was significantly higher than the other two groups in normal situation. memory and enhance their cognitive performances. The subjects medium test anxiety would decrease their false Key words : Test anxiety ; false memory ; deese2roediger2mcdermott paradigm ; arousal situation ( 40 ) Measuring Students Representation Level on Arithmetic Word Problems : Based on the Relational2Representational Complexity Model XIN Zi2qiang ZHAN G Li ( Institute of Developmental Psychology Beijing Normal University Beijing 100875 China) Abstract :Students often have difficulty in solving arithmetic word problems. According to the relational2representational complexity model developed by Xin Ziqiang ( 200322008) the difficulty of an arithmetic word problem is determined partly by the relational complexity of variables in the problem. Based on the model in the present study a test consisting of 24 arithmetic word problems with different levels of relational complexity was designed for measuring children. The test was administrated to 165 students from grade 4 5 6 and 7. Results showed that : (1) prior analyzed problems relational complexity (involving analysis of relational complexity of variables in every item) could predict most variance of task difficulty (73. 7 % of error percentage 78. 7 % of a difficulty index of Rasch model) and the criterion validity with the SOLO taxonomy test was 0. 65 ; (2) students representation levels on the test improved with grades. Such results indicted that the test is an effective and reliable instrument for measuring children s representation levels changing with grades. Key words :the relational2representational complexity model ; hierarchical complexity ; word problem test ; task difficulty ; representation levels 53