Bao Yan, Pöppel Ernst, Wang Lingyan, Lin Xiaoxiong, Yang Taoxi, Avram Mihai, Blautzik Janusch, Paolini Marco, Silveira Sarita, Vedder Aline, Zaytseva Yuliya, Zhou Bin
Department of Psychology and Beijing Key Laboratory of Behavior and Mental Health, Peking University, Beijing, China.
Institute of Medical Psychology and Human Science Center, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany.
Psych J. 2015 Dec;4(4):243-54. doi: 10.1002/pchj.119.
Synchronizing neural processes, mental activities, and social interactions is considered to be fundamental for the creation of temporal order on the personal and interpersonal level. Several different types of synchronization are distinguished, and for each of them examples are given: self-organized synchronizations on the neural level giving rise to pre-semantically defined time windows of some tens of milliseconds and of approximately 3 s; time windows that are created by synchronizing different neural representations, as for instance in aesthetic appreciations or moral judgments; and synchronization of biological rhythms with geophysical cycles, like the circadian clock with the 24-hr rhythm of day and night. For the latter type of synchronization, an experiment is described that shows the importance of social interactions for sharing or avoiding common time. In a group study with four subjects being completely isolated together for 3 weeks from the external world, social interactions resulted both in intra- and interindividual circadian synchronization and desynchronization. A unique phenomenon in circadian regulation is described, the "beat phenomenon," which has been made visible by the interaction of two circadian rhythms with different frequencies in one body. The separation of the two physiological rhythms was the consequence of social interactions, that is, by the desire of a subject to share and to escape common time during different phases of the long-term experiment. The theoretical arguments on synchronization are summarized with the general statement: "Nothing in cognitive science makes sense except in the light of time windows." The hypothesis is forwarded that time windows that express discrete timing mechanisms in behavioral control and on the level of conscious experiences are the necessary bases to create cognitive order, and it is suggested that time windows are implemented by neural oscillations in different frequency domains.
同步神经过程、心理活动和社会互动被认为是在个人和人际层面创建时间秩序的基础。区分了几种不同类型的同步,并针对每种同步给出了示例:神经层面的自组织同步产生了几十毫秒和约3秒的语义前定义时间窗口;通过同步不同神经表征创建的时间窗口,例如在审美欣赏或道德判断中;以及生物节律与地球物理周期的同步,如昼夜节律钟与24小时昼夜节律。对于后一种同步类型,描述了一项实验,该实验表明社会互动对于共享或避免共同时间的重要性。在一项对四名受试者进行为期3周完全与世隔绝的群体研究中,社会互动导致了个体内和个体间的昼夜节律同步和不同步。描述了昼夜节律调节中的一种独特现象,即“节拍现象”,它通过一个体内两种不同频率的昼夜节律相互作用而显现出来。两种生理节律的分离是社会互动的结果,也就是说,是受试者在长期实验的不同阶段共享和逃避共同时间的愿望导致的。关于同步的理论观点总结为一般性陈述:“认知科学中没有任何东西是有意义的,除非从时间窗口的角度来看。”提出的假设是,在行为控制和意识体验层面表达离散计时机制的时间窗口是创建认知秩序的必要基础,并建议时间窗口由不同频域的神经振荡实现。