词汇决策任务在依恋研究中的应用与展望
Application and Prospects of Lexical Decision Tasks in Attachment Research
摘要: 本综述旨在综合与分析采用词汇决策任务来探究成人依恋中内隐认知过程的研究文献。通过梳理主要研究焦点、方法论途径及关键发现,力图调和现有研究结果,特别是关于回避型依恋的矛盾结论,并在此基础上提出未来研究的新方向。作为一篇叙述性综述,本文对现有实证研究与理论文献进行了分析与综合。所考察的方法包括运用词汇决策任务结合多种启动技术(如阈上启动、阈下启动、听觉启动)及情境操控(如威胁、信任、成功/失败情境),以评估与依恋相关的预期、信息抑制及概念可及性。文献表明,词汇决策任务能有效量化人际预期(如信任、拒绝),并描绘出依恋对象与主题的可及性图谱,从而区分安全型、焦虑型与回避型依恋风格。方法论上的差异显著影响研究结果。关于回避型依恋的矛盾发现,主要可归因于研究情境的差异、拒绝型回避与恐惧型回避的区分,以及抑制依恋系统激活的认知失活策略的运作。词汇决策任务为揭示依恋的内隐认知结构提供了一个可靠且灵活的研究范式。未来研究应借助此工具,探索新兴领域(如人机依恋),深入考察社会判断中的解释偏向,并发展更精细的启动方法,以进一步揭示成人依恋的复杂性。
Abstract: This review aims to synthesize and analyze the literature on the use of lexical decision tasks (LDTs) to investigate implicit cognitive processes in adult attachment. By integrating key research themes, methodological approaches, and major findings, the review seeks to reconcile existing results, particularly the contradictory conclusions regarding avoidant attachment, and proposes new directions for future research. As a narrative review, this paper analyzes and synthesizes empirical studies and theoretical literature in the field. The methods examined include lexical decision tasks combined with various priming techniques (e.g., supraliminal, subliminal, and auditory priming) and contextual manipulations (e.g., threat, trust, success/failure contexts) to assess attachment-related expectations, information inhibition, and concept accessibility. The literature demonstrates that lexical decision tasks can effectively quantify interpersonal expectations (e.g., trust, rejection) and map the accessibility of attachment figures and themes, thereby distinguishing among secure, anxious, and avoidant attachment styles. Methodological variations significantly influence research outcomes. The inconsistent findings regarding avoidant attachment can largely be attributed to differences in research contexts, the distinction between dismissing-avoidant and fearful-avoidant subtypes, and the operation of cognitive deactivation strategies that suppress the activation of the attachment system. Lexical decision tasks provide a reliable and flexible paradigm for revealing the implicit cognitive architecture of attachment. Future studies should utilize this tool to explore emerging areas (e.g., human-AI attachment), investigate interpretation biases in social judgment, and develop more refined priming methods to further elucidate the complexity of adult attachment.
文章引用:云雯 (2026). 词汇决策任务在依恋研究中的应用与展望. 心理学进展, 16(3), 385-391. https://doi.org/10.12677/ap.2026.163153

参考文献

[1] 侯珂, 邹泓, 蒋索(2005). 社会人格取向的成人依恋研究. 心理科学进展, (5), 640-650.
[2] 李彩娜, 孙颖, 拓瑞, 刘佳(2016). 安全依恋对人际信任的影响: 依恋焦虑的调节效应. 心理学报, 48(8), 989-1001.
[3] Baldwin, M. W., & Kay, A. C. (2003). Adult Attachment and the Inhibition of Rejection. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 22, 275-293.[CrossRef
[4] Baldwin, M. W., & Meunier, J. (1999). The Cued Activation of Attachment Relational Schemas. Social Cognition, 17, 209-227.[CrossRef
[5] Baldwin, M. W., Fehr, B., Keedian, E., Seidel, M., & Thomson, D. W. (1993). An Exploration of the Relational Schemata Underlying Attachment Styles: Self-Report and Lexical Decision Approaches. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19, 746-754.[CrossRef
[6] Baldwin, M. W., Keelan, J. P. R., Fehr, B., Enns, V., & Koh-Rangarajoo, E. (1996). Social-Cognitive Conceptualization of Attachment Working Models: Availability and Accessibility Effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 94-109.[CrossRef
[7] Beckes, L., Coan, J. A., & Morris, J. P. (2013). Implicit Conditioning of Faces via the Social Regulation of Emotion: ERP Evidence of Early Attentional Biases for Security Conditioned Faces. Psychophysiology, 50, 734-742.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[8] Cheng, J., Cui, F., Chen, Y., & Wu, J. (2025). Disruption of Moral Perception under Acute Anxiety: Behavioral and Electrophysiological Evidence: Abbreviated Title: Anxiety Disrupts Moral Perception. Current Psychology, 44, 18081-18090.[CrossRef
[9] Fraley, R. C., Garner, J. P., & Shaver, P. R. (2000). Adult Attachment and the Defensive Regulation of Attention and Memory: Examining the Role of Preemptive and Postemptive Defensive Processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 816-826.[CrossRef
[10] Gillath, O., Liese, B. S., & Karantzas, G. C. (2025). Can a One-Time Subtle Attachment Security Priming Impact Outcomes in the Real World? International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 22, Article No. 441.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[11] Gillath, O., Mikulincer, M., Fitzsimons, G. M., Shaver, P. R., Schachner, D. A., & Bargh, J. A. (2006). Automatic Activation of Attachment-Related Goals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 1375-1388.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[12] Granqvist, P., Mikulincer, M., Gewirtz, V., & Shaver, P. R. (2012). Experimental Findings on God as an Attachment Figure: Normative Processes and Moderating Effects of Internal Working Models. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103, 804-818.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[13] Liu, J., & Fan, L. (2026). The Effects of Trait Anxiety and Emotional Word Type on the Processing of Chinese Words: An ERP Study. Behavioral Sciences, 16, Article No. 96.[CrossRef
[14] Mikulincer, M., Birnbaum, G., Woddis, D., & Nachmias, O. (2000). Stress and Accessibility of Proximity-Related Thoughts: Exploring the Normative and Intraindividual Components of Attachment Theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 509-523.[CrossRef
[15] Mikulincer, M., Gillath, O., & Shaver, P. R. (2002). Activation of the Attachment System in Adulthood: Threat-Related Primes Increase the Accessibility of Mental Representations of Attachment Figures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 881-895.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[16] Rowe, A., & Carnelley, K. B. (2003). Attachment Style Differences in the Processing of Attachment-Relevant Information: Primed-Style Effects on Recall, Interpersonal Expectations, and Affect. Personal Relationships, 10, 59-75.[CrossRef
[17] Van IJzendoorn, M. H., & Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J. (2021). Replication Crisis Lost in Translation? On Translational Caution and Premature Applications of Attachment Theory. Attachment & Human Development, 23, 422-437.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[18] Wühr, P., & Heuer, H. (2022). Mapping Effects in Choice-Response and Go/No-Go Variants of the Lexical Decision Task: A Case for Polarity Correspondence. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 75, 491-507.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[19] Zayas, V., Shoda, Y., Mischel, W., Osterhout, L., & Takahashi, M. (2009). Neural Responses to Partner Rejection Cues. Psychological Science, 20, 813-821.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[20] Zilcha-Mano, S., Dolev-Amit, T., Fisher, H., Ein-Dor, T., & Strauß, B. (2021). Patients’ Individual Differences in Implicit and Explicit Expectations from the Therapist as a Function of Attachment Orientation. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 68, 682-695.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[21] Zilcha-Mano, S., Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2011). An Attachment Perspective on Human-Pet Relationships: Conceptualization and Assessment of Pet Attachment Orientations. Journal of Research in Personality, 45, 345-357.[CrossRef