臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

本研究檢視軀體標記假說與意識之關係。研究中使用一修改版愛荷華賭博作業，其中與各副牌所連結的情緒為由閾下呈現的情緒圖片在意識下所引發，而意識上每副牌輸贏的訊息則加以控制。本研究透過此作業以及實驗設計上不同的操弄，結果發現：意識應為軀體標記運作時的必要條件。此外，即使是與作業無關的情緒也可以被當作軀體標記加以被處理。再則，軀體標記的運作可以在具有衝突的作業情境下發生。最後，本研究提出了一個軀體標記運作的可能機制。

The present study aimed to examine the relation between Somatic Marker (SM) Hypothesis and consciousness. A revised Iowa Gambling Task (IGT) was created in which emotions attached to different decks are activated unconsciously by subliminally presenting different emotional pictures. On the other hand, conscious information coming from task outcomes is controlled. Based upon this task, and with some variances in experimental designs, it was found that consciousness might be necessary in SM operation. In addition, even emotions that are irrelevant the ongoing task can be taken as SMs. Furthermore, the SM operation can be taken place when the task or situation is with conflict. A possible mechanism for SM operation is also proposed in the study.

1.Introduction.....1
2.Literature Review....5
2-1.The Somatic Marker Hypothesis....5
2-1-1.Iowa Gambling Task....5
2-1-2.Skyrocketed SCRs Warn the Normal Participants....6
2-1-3.Ventromedial Prefrontal Cortex Underlines SM Operation....7
2-1-4.Summary....8
2-2.Consciousness in the IGT....8
2-2-1.SM Operation May be Independent From Consciousness....8
2-2-2.Maia and McClelland’s Critiques....9
2-2-3.Does SM Operation Require Working Memory?....9
2-2-4.Summary....11
3.The Present Study....12
3-1.Exploring Consciousness and SM Operation....12
3-2.Exploring Task Conflict Degree and Task-Irrelevant Emotions in SMH....13
3-3.Questions in Present Study....16
4.Experiment One....18
5.Experiment Two....25
6.Experiment Three....34
7.General Discussion....38
References....46
Appendixes....50
Vita....53

Adinoff, B., Devous Sr., M. D., Cooper, D. B., Best, S. E., Chandler, P., & Harris, T. (2003). Resting regional cerebral blood flow and gambling task performance in cocaine-dependent subjects and healthy comparison subjects. American Journal of Psychiatry, 160(10), 1892-1894.

Bechara, A., & Damasio, A. R. (2005). The somatic marker hypothesis: A neural theory of economic decision. Games and Economic Behaviour, 52(2), 336-372.

Bechara, A., Damasio, A. R., & Damasio, H. (2000). Emotion, decision making, and the orbitofrontal cortex. Cerebral Cortex, 10(3), 295-307.

Bechara, A., Damasio, A. R., Damasio, H., & Anderson, S. W. (1994). Insensitivity to future consequences following damage to human prefrontal cortex. Cognition, 50, 7-15.

Bechara, A., Damasio, H., Damasio, A. R., & Lee, G. P. (1999). Different contributions of the human amygdala and ventromedial prefrontal cortex to decision-making. The Journal of Neuroscience, 19(13), 5473-5481.

Bechara, A., Damasio, H., Tranel, D., & Anderson, S. W. (1998). Dissociation of working memory from decision making within the human prefrontal cortex. The Journal of Neuroscience, 18(1), 428-437.

Bechara, A., Damasio, H., Tranel, D., & Damasio, A. R. (1997). Deciding advantageously before knowing the advantageous strategy. Science, 275, 1293-1295.

Bechara, A., Damasio, H., Tranel, D., & Damasio, A. R. (2005). The Iowa gambling task and the somatic marker hypothesis: Some questions and answers. Trends in Cognitive Science, 9(4), 159-162.

Bechara, A., Tranel, D., Damasio, H., & Damasio, A. R. (1996). Failure to respond autonomically to anticipated future outcomes following damage to prefrontal cortex. Cerebral Cortex, 6, 215-225.

Beer, J. S., Shimamura, A. P., & Knight, R. (2004). Frontal lobe contributions to executive control of cognitive and social behavior. In M. S. Gazzaniga (Eds.), The cognitive neurosciences (3rd ed.)(pp.1091-1104). MA: MIT Press.

Carter, S. & Pasqualini, S. (2004). Stronger autonomic response accompanies better learning: A test of Damasio’s Somatic Marker Hypothesis. Cognition and Emotion, 18(7), 901-911.

Chen, K. H. , Yen, N. S., Chang, Y. C., Chen, P. T. , & Liao, K. M. (2005, October). Testing somatic marker hypothesis with manipulating suboptimal emotional stimuli. Paper presented at the 44th Annual Meeting of the Taiwanese Psychological Association, Chung Li, Taiwan.

Chen, K. H., Yen, N. S., Liao, K. M., & Chang, Y. C. (2006, August). Somatic marker hypothesis is not replicated with unconscious manipulations. Poster presented at the 114th annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Cuthbert, B. N., Schupp, H. T., Bradley, M. M., Birbaumer, N., & Lang, P. J. (2000). Brain potentials in affective picture processing: Covariation with autonomic arousal and affective report. Biological Psychology, 52(2), 95-111.

Damasio, A. R. (1994). Descartes’ error: Emotion, reasoning, and human brain. NY: Grosset/Putnam.

Damasio, H., Bechara, A., & Damasio, A. R. (2002). Reply to “Do somatic markers mediate decisions on the gambling task?” Nature Neuroscience, 5(11), 1104.

Dunn, B. D., Dalgleish, T., & Lawrence, A. D. (2006). The somatic marker hypothesis: A critical evaluation. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 30(2), 239-271.

Elliott, R., Dolan, R. J., & Frith, C. D. (2000). Dissociable functions in the medial and lateral orbitofrontal cortex: Evidence from human neuroimaging studies. Cerebral Cortex, 10(3), 308-317.

Hinson, J. M., Jameson, T. L., & Whitney, P. (2002). Somatic markers, working memory, and decision making. Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral Neuroscience, 2(4), 341-353.

Jameson, T. L., Hinson, J. M., & Whitney, P. (2004). Component of the working memory and somatic marker in decision marking. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 11(3), 515-520.

Lang, P. J., Bradley, M. M., & Cuthbert, B. N. (2005). International affective picture system (IAPS): Affective ratings of pictures and instruction manual. Technical Report A-6. University of Florida, Gainesville, FL.

Loewenstein, G., & Lerner, J. S. (2003). The role of affect in decision making. In R. J. Davidson, K. R. Scherer, & H. H. Goldsmith (Eds.), Handbook of affective sciences (pp.187-211). NY: Oxford Press.

Maia, T. V., & McClelland, J. L. (2004). A reexamination of the evidence for somatic marker hypothesis: What participants really know in the Iowa gambling task. The National Academy of Science of the U. S. A., 101, 16075-16080.

Murphy, S. T., & Zajonc, R. B. (1993). Affect, cognition, and awareness: Affective priming with optimal and suboptimal stimulus exposures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64(5), 723-739.

Peters, E., & Slovic, P. (2000). The springs of action: Affective and analytical information processing in choice. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(12), 1465-1475.

Rolls, E. T. (2005). Emotion explained. NY: Oxford University Press.

Suzuki, A., Hirota, A., Takasawa, N., & Shigemasu, K. (2003). Application of the Somatic Marker Hypothesis to individual differences in decision making. Biological Psychology, 65, 81-88.

Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124-1131.

Wiens, S., & Öhman, A. (2007). Probing unconscious emotion process: On becoming a successful musketeer. In J. A. Coan, & J. J. B. Allen (Eds.), Handbook of emotion elicitation and assessment (pp. 65-90). NY: Oxford Press.