摘要
长期以来,由于哲学、语言学等学科研究中只将隐喻看作是暗喻,把其当作修辞手段,致使20世纪80年代,许多研究者将隐喻作为认知方式对其进行强调和研究,不同分支的心理学包括认知心理学、学习心理学、积极心理学都对隐喻研究有所关注。认知心理学研究隐喻侧重点为隐喻句理解的心理加工机制,对概念隐喻理解时的美感体验与认知的关系研究未充分关注;可是部分关于隐喻句理解的脑区活动特点的研究显示了隐喻句理解可能激活与情绪反应有关的脑区活动,能否激活与情绪反应有关的脑区活动主要跟隐喻句的新颖性、形象性等因素有关,而新颖性、形象性等又是美学研究者所强调的能否引起美感体验的重要因素,认知神经科学的研究为隐喻句理解中有美感体验提供了一定的证据。随着学习心理学研究的深入,研究者们意识到学习既是“高度概括的规律性命题体系的建立”,也需要“高质量大跨度迁移”,需要将本质与现象对应,由此对隐喻认知的研究日益重视。有研究者提到了隐喻认知中的美感体验作用问题,但美感体验与认知的深层关系还需进一步实证。20世纪80年代以来,积极心理学有关积极情感与认知的关系问题研究日渐升温,我国心理学界在那时与西方积极心理学致力于幸福观、流畅感等积极情感对认知的作用研究不同的地方是:20世纪80年代我国的研究者关注到了美感与认知的关系问题,心理学家刘兆吉提出了“美育心理学”的学科概念,美育问题正式进入了心理学领域。在美育心理学研究中,美感体验是美育的特色,美感体验力的培养方法及以感情激发为核心的情感与认知的关系问题是美育心理学需要解决的十分重要的问题,围绕美育心理学研究的核心问题,结合当前教育实践中倡导的学科整合应在概念层面上进行的理念,本项研究选取科学概念理解作为视角,以概念隐喻理解为引导策略,假设在概念隐喻理解过程中,学生会有美感体验,美感体验对科学概念理解有促进作用。对这一问题的研究,其理论价值体现在可为美育心理学核心问题的深入解决提供研究模式和参考结论;二是从实践角度来看,可将其运用到教育教学等领域,为审美化教学实施等提供理论依据。
主体将目标域概念A的本质蕴涵在形象生动的源域概念A'中,通过A'以认识A本质特征的这样一种认知方式,就是概念隐喻认知。概念隐喻认知与一般认知最大的不同在于概念隐喻(抓住事物本质特征的隐喻,是隐喻的一种)是有美感体验的认知活动。本项研究中“美感体验”是指主体在对认知对象进行有意味的形式认知中表现出的敏感、细致、好奇,进取、愉悦的心理状态。
整篇文章写作分了上编、中编、下编三个部分。
上编(第1章-第7章)包括文献综述、问题提出,并对概念隐喻和美感体验两个概念进行了探索性因素分析和验证性因素分析,获得了有关这两个概念的内涵、结构和测查工具,做了美感体验和概念隐喻之间的相关研究,研究结果拓展了已有研究的发展。
中编(第8章-第13章)为实证研究设计及被试选择、实验材料搜集和测量工具的研究。在上编内容的基础上,进一步对所提问题研究及其实证和量化难点进行了确认。已有研究中对美感体验的测查采用美感词词表或者是等级评定的方法,本项研究既采用美感词词表(可测审美风格、审美中的情绪、审美丰富性),也采用愉悦情绪自我报告的5级评定量表,还使用了《自编科学概念学习过程中的美感体验问卷》(该问卷是在附录2《自编美感体验问卷》中,抽取包含了美感体验8因素的有关科学美感体验的16个项目,结合本项研究所要考察的3个概念,将抽取的这16个项目句进行了修改后形成的问卷,见155-156页)
下编(第14章-第-15章)针对儿童在概念隐喻理解过程中能否产生美感体验,美感体验是否有助于对抽象概念本质进行理解这一问题解决提出了四个假设,设计了两项实验。所有研究采用的科学概念分别是“力”、“极限”和“节奏”。
整个研究对有关假设进行了验证,涉及6个研究:
(1)儿童“力”、“极限”、“节奏”3个概念自然状态下的发展研究——为选择研究对象为11-14岁儿童提供依据,为实验研究的结论获得提供参照系
(2) 11-14岁儿童有关“力”、“极限”、“节奏”3个概念的前概念研究
(3)有关“力”、“极限”、“节奏”3个概念的概念隐喻句语料收集及11-14岁儿童对概念隐喻句的心理维度研究
(4)美感体验测查工具之一——有关“力”、“极限”、“节奏”概念的美感词词表的编制
(5)实验1:概念隐喻句理解过程中,美感体验在11-14岁儿童前概念转换过程中的作用
(6)实验2:概念隐喻理解(概念隐喻句理解,概念图理解、原型理解)过程中,11-14岁儿童的美感体验在科学概念理解中的作用
研究所得总结论如下:
●概念隐喻理解与美感体验有显著的正相关;
●与控制组相比,概念隐喻理解对科学概念理解有显著的促进作用;
●概念隐喻理解成绩与美感体验程度对儿童科学概念理解有交互作用。美感体验在隐喻理解和科学概念理解之间起显著的中介作用。
●美感体验对认知有显著增力性。
各项研究主要分结论如下:
●概念隐喻句理解中,愉悦感以及审美中的情绪对学生前概念转换存在交互作用,但儿童先前对概念非正式的知识的作用更显著。
●儿童科学概念理解的年龄主效应显著。儿童在教学引导后的前概念转换、儿童对科学概念下定义的精准性及美感体验对儿童科学概念理解成绩均具有预测作用,相比之下,前概念转换、儿童对科学概念下定义的精准性对儿童科学概念理解成绩的预测作用更显著。
●概念隐喻理解、美感体验对儿童科学概念理解有交互作用。美感体验对儿童科学概念理解的作用具体表现在:
愉悦感越强烈,科学概念理解的成绩越好;在审美丰富性方面,只有一定程度上的审美丰富性(平均每个概念能用3-6个美感词里表述)才对儿童科学概念的理解起促进作用。
教学引导策略与审美丰富性的交互作用具体体现为:就每个概念而言,被试平均能用2-4个美感词来表述自己的感受时,教学引导策略对儿童科学概念理解成绩的影响有显著差异,概念隐喻句教学引导效果最好,原型启发教学引导次之,概念图解再次之。
只有在概念图解教学引导下,审美风格不同,儿童科学概念理解成绩有显著差异。在概念图解引导下,鼓励和启发被试体验优美,这样有助于促进其科学概念理解水平,而其余两种教学引导策略下,审美风格对儿童科学概念理解的作用差异不显著。
这两项实验证明了美感体验在概念隐喻理解和科学概念理解之间的中介作用,探索了美感体验、前概念、认知等因素之间的关系,建立了关系模型。
本项研究的价值表现在对隐喻和概念隐喻进行区分有助于我们对隐喻作用的深入认识,对概念隐喻的结构探讨,可为概念隐喻认知的量化研究提供参考指标;对美感体验进行理论探讨,可为审美心理学、美学中有关“审美认知”的理论建构提供一定的参考,也可为积极心理学对美感的进一步研究起到参考作用;本项研究证明了概念隐喻理解中,主体的美感体验与认知因素对科学概念理解有交互作用,探索了美感体验、前概念、认知等因素之间的关系并尝试建立了关系模型,有利于科学美研究的深化。本项研究的创新点表现在:首次对概念隐喻和美感体验两个概念进行结构因素分析;澄清了概念隐喻和隐喻的区别,美感体验和美感的区别,对概念隐喻的作用加以深入认识,证明了概念隐喻认知能使主体产生美感体验并促进其理解概念本质,概念隐喻引导教学策略是有效教学策略之一。
For a long time, philosophical and linguistics research on metaphor was just regarded it as a way of rhetoric. In 1980s, many researchers dealt it as a way of cognitive style. The different branches of psychology, including cognitive psychology, learning psychology, positive psychology research involved metaphor. Research of cognitive psychology trended to focus on the psychological mechanisms of metaphorical sentences, and have not enough concentrated on the relationship of aesthetic experience and cognition; However, some brain activity cognitive neuroscience studies on metaphorical sentence understanding have shown that it may stimulate the brain region concerning emotional response, which is due to the different novelty and image of metaphorical sentences, and researchers stressed that different novelty is a important factor to arouse the aesthetic experience, which is due to the different novelty of metaphorical sentences, and researchers stressed that different novelty is a important factor to arouse the aesthetic experience. Cognitive neuroscience researches have supplied some evidence for the existence of aesthetic experience in the understanding of the metaphorical sentences. With the development of learning psychology and education , researchers aware learning is not only "to construct a highly general and regular system", but also "to accomplish a high-quality and large-span migration", and need correspond the essence of thing with the phenomenon, so researchers paid more and more attention on metaphorical cognition. Some researchers have referred to the aesthetic experience in metaphorical cognition, but they lacked empirical research. Since the 1980s, in positive psychology studies on the relationship between positive feelings and cognition have been more and more popular. At that time, western psychologist trended to probe the affection that positive emotion such as feeling of happiness, fluency put on the cognition, however Chinese psychologist begun to aware the relationship between the aesthetic experience and cognition . Liu Zhaoji put forward the subject concept of "psychology of aesthetic education", aesthetics issues has formally became one part of psychology. In psychology of aesthetic education, aesthetic experience is the characteristics of aesthetic education, the most important and urgent problem is to find methods to improve the ability of aesthetic experience and confirm the relationship between cognition and emotion. Intertwined the key problem of psychology of aesthetic education, based on the other empirical studies, accommodated the idea that the subject should be integrated in the concept level this research selected scientific concept understanding as a viewpoint, took concept metaphor understanding as guidable strategy, and assumed in the process of concept metaphor understanding students would experience the aesthetic emotion ,aesthetic experience would improve scientific concept understanding. The theoretic meaning of this research is that it will supply research model and reference conclusion to solve the key problem of psychology of aesthetic education; the practical meaning is to apply it into education and supply aestheticalization instruction with theoretic evidence.
The cognitive mode that subjects hide the target scientific concept A in the vivid source concept A',via A' to understand the essence of A is called conceptual metaphor. (grasping the essential character of the target object is one kind of metaphor). Conceptual metaphor. is one kind cognitive activity with aesthetic experience. In this research, aesthetic experience is that subjects indicate sensitive, particular, curious, enterprising, joy psychological states when they cognize the objects with intention. and observe meaningful format.
The paper has three parts:
Section one (Chapter 1 - Chapter 7), including literature review, issues, and the exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis for metaphor and the aesthetic experience, achieving the definition, structure and testing of these concepts, correlated analysis for aesthetic experience and conceptual metaphor ,developing the past research.
Section Two: (Chapter 8-Chapter13) researches on experimental designing, participants choosing, experimental materials collection and measure tool study. On the base of Section One, this part further affirms researching problems and experimental quantitative difficulties. The past researching used aesthetic glossary or rank evaluating method to investigate aesthetic experience, but this research uses both aesthetic glossaries, including aesthetic style, aesthetic emotion, aesthetic richness, but also the ending joy emotion five-square self-report scale, and uses the Self-Made Questionnaire of the Aesthetic Experience in the Process of Scientific Concept Learning, takes the reference to appendix two of Self-Made Aesthetic Experience Questionnaire. Sixteen items related with scientific aesthetic experience are drew out from eight aesthetic experience elements. Combining with the three concepts in this research, sixteen items will be drew out to be revised to form the questionnaire, please see pp155-156
Section Three: (Chapter 14-Chapter 15) on the hypothesis of whether aesthetic experience can be produced during the process of children's concept metaphor understanding, whether aesthetic experience can promote abstract concept understanding, laying-out two experiments, all researches are using scientific concepts, which are power, limit and rhythm.
The whole research validates the related hypothesis, involving six researches:
(1) The three concepts of children's natural development offers the bases of choosing subjects on the age of 11-14 years old, and offers frame of reference to obtain the experimental conclusion.
(2) the pre-concept research for 11 to 14-year-old children on three concepts: the force, the limit, the rhythm.
(3) The concept metaphor sentences collecting of power, limit, rhythm, and psychological dimension researches on the concept metaphor sentences of the children on the age of 11-14 years old.
(4) As one of the aesthetic experience testing tools—aesthetic glossary workout. (5)Experiment one: in the process of concept metaphor understanding, the role ofaesthetic experience in the pre-concept transformation of children on the age of 11-14 years old.
(6) Experiment two: in the process of the concept metaphor understanding that includes concept metaphor sentence understanding, concept schema understanding, autotype understanding, and the role of aesthetic experience in the scientific concept understanding of children on the age of 11-14 years old.
Conclusions all in all are as follows:
Concept metaphor understanding has striking positive relation with aesthetic experience;
Comparison to controlling group, concept metaphor understanding has striking;
Score of concept metaphor understanding and aesthetic experience have interaction with children's scientific concept understanding. Aesthetic experience is the media in bridging metaphor understanding and scientific concept understanding.
Aesthetic experience has positive role to cognition.
The main conclusion of different sub-researches is as follows:
In the conceptual metaphor understanding, joy psychological states, the positive or negative aesthetic emotions have interaction with the pre-concept transformation of students, but much striking role to children's experience.
Primary effect of age is significant to children's scientific concept understanding. After the instruction induction, children's pre-concept transformation, the preciseness of conception scientific concept and aesthetic experience has expecting role to achievement of children's scientific concept understanding, Comparing with it, the pre-concept transformation and the preciseness of scientific conception of children have much positive predictive role.
Conceptual metaphor understanding, aesthetic experience has interaction with children's scientific understanding. The concrete expression of aesthetic experience role to understand scientific concept are as follows:
The higher the feeling of joy, the better the achievement of scientific concept understanding; on the aspect of richness of aesthetic appreciation, only to some degree (each concept expressing within three to six aesthetic words on the average) has positive role to children's scientific understanding.
The interaction of instruction induction strategies with aesthetic richness are as follows: to each concept, participants can use 2-4 aesthetic words to express their own feeling, instruction induction strategies have significant difference to children's scientific concept understanding, conceptual metaphor instruction induction effects is the best, and autotype illumination instruction induction ranks the second, and the third is concept schema understanding;
Only under the concept schema instruction induction, aesthetic style has some difference, and has significant difference to children's scientific concept understanding. And inspiring and illumination participants to experience elegancy, positive role to understanding scientific concepts, while under the other two strategies, aesthetic style is not much significant.
The two experiments prove that aesthetic experience is a media between the conceptual metaphor understanding and scientific concept understanding, exploring elements' relationship and mode including aesthetic feeling, aesthetic experience, and cognition etc.
The value of this research is that classifying metaphor and conceptual metaphor, which promote us to re-understanding the role of metaphor, and the discussion on the structure of conceptual metaphor can offer some reference index to the quantification of conceptual metaphor cognition; the theory discussion on aesthetic experience can offer some reference to aesthetic cognition theory construction in aesthetic psychology and aesthetic itself and also to the further research of aesthetic feeling in positive psychology; And the innovative points of this research are as follows: firstly analyzing the implicit structure of conceptual metaphor and aesthetic experience; classifying the difference of conceptual metaphor and metaphor, and of aesthetic experience and aesthetic feeling, re-understanding the role of conceptual metaphor, and proving that conceptual metaphor cognition can promote subjects to understand the nature of aesthetic understanding, and conceptual metaphor instruction induction strategy is an effective teaching strategy.
引文
[1]Alan J Bamett. (200&). Transformations In Treatment: Sublimatory Implications of an Interdisciplinary Hypothesis on the Metaphoric Processing of Emotional Experience. New York:Psychoanalytic Review, 95 (1) ,79-108
[2]Ahrens, H. Liu, C. Lee, S. Gong, S. Fang and Y.Y. Hsu. (2007). Functional MRI of Conventional and Anomalous Metaphors in Mandarin Chinese, Brain and Language, 100,163-171
[3]Aisling M. Leavy, Fiona A. McSorley and Lisa A. Bote. (2007). An examination of what metaphor construction reveals about the evolution of preservice teachers' beliefs about teaching and learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(7), 1217-1233
[4]Alexander M. Rapp, Dirk T. Leube, Michael Erb, Wolfgang Grodd and Tilo T.J. Kirche. .(2007). Laterality in metaphor processing: Lack of evidence from functional magnetic resonance imaging for the right hemisphere theory, 100 (2) ,142-149.
[5]Alice M.Isen. (2005).A Role for Neuropsychology in Understanding the Facilitating Influence of Positive Affect on Social Behavior and Cognitive Processes(pp.528-537). Edited By C.R.Snyder Shane J.Lopez.Handbook of Posychology.Oxford university press
[6]Anaki et al, D. Anaki, M. Faust and S. Kravetz. (1998). Cerebral hemisphere asymmetries in processing lexical metaphors, Neuropsychology, 36,353-362.
[7]Annamma Joy, John F Sherry Jr. (2003). Speaking of art as embodied imagination: Amultisensory approach to understanding aesthetic experience. Journal of Consumer Research.Gainesville, 30(2), 259
[8]Argyris K Stringair. Nicholas C. Medford, Vincent Giampietro, Michael J. Brammer and Anthony S. David. (2007). Deriving meaning: Distinct neural mechanisms for metaphoric, literal, and non-meaningful sentences . Brain and Language, 100 (2) , 150-162
[9]Aristotle.(1954). Rhetoric and Poetics. New York:The Modern Library
[10]Baker, W., & Lawson, A. E. (2001). Complex instructional analogies and theoretical concept acquisition in college genetics. Science Education, 85(6), 665-683
[11]Barbara L.Fredrickson. (2005). Positive Emotion. Edited By C.R.Snyder Shane J.Lopez.Handbook of Posychology (pp.120-34) . Oxford university press
[12]Barman, Charles R, Barman, Natalie S, Miller, Julie A. (1996).Two teaching methods and students' understanding of sound. School Science and Mathematics, 96(2), 635
[13]Bookheimer, S. Bookheimer. (2002). Functional MRI of language: new approaches to understanding the cortical organization of semantic processing, Annual Review of Neuroscience,25,151-188.
[14]Bottini et al., G Bottini, R. Corcoran, R. Sterzi, E. Paulesu, P. Schenone and P. Scarpa et al..(1994) .The role of the right hemisphere in the interpretation of figurative aspects of language. A positron emission tomography activation study, Brain, 117,1241-1253.
[15]Brain F. Bowd, Dedre Gentner. (2005). The career of metaphor. Psychological Review,112(1), 193-216
[16]Brown, A. L., & Kane, M. J. (1988). Preschool children can learn to transfer: Learning to learn and learning from example. Cognitive Psychology, 20,493-523
[17]Brown,D. E.& Clement, J. (1989). Overcoming misconceptions via analogical reasoning: Abstract transfer versus explanatory model construction. Instructional Science, 18,237-261
[18]Brownell et al., H.H. Brownell, H.H. Potter, D. Michelow and H. Gardner. (1984).Sensitivity to lexical denotation and connotation in brain-damaged patients: a double dissciation?,Brain and Language, 22 ,253-265
[19]Burgess and Chiarello, C. Burgess and C. Chiarello. (1996). Neurocognitive mechanisms underlying metaphor comprehension and other figurative language, Metaphor and symbolic activity,11,67-84.
[20]Cinzia Di Dio, Emiliano Macaluso, Giacomo Rizzolatti. (2007). The Golden Beauty: Brain Response to Classical and Renaissance Sculptures. PLos ONE 2(11), e1201.
[21]Cicone, Gardner, & Winner, M. Cicone, H. Gardner and E. Winner. (1981) . Understanding the psychology in psychological metaphors, Journal of Child Language, 8 (1), 213-216.
[22]Coulson and Wu, S. Coulson and Y.C. Wu. (2005) .Right hemisphere activation of joke-related information: an event-related brain potential study, Journal of cognitive Neuroscience, 17,494-506.
[23]Cutting, J. E. Gustave Caillebotte, French Impressionism, and mere exposure. Helmut Leder, Benno Belke, Andries Oeberst, Dorothee Augustin. (2004). A model of aesthetic appreciation and aesthetic judgments.London: British Journal of Psychology, 95(11), 489-501
[24]David Galin. (2004). Aesthetic Marcel Proust and the neo-Jamesian structure of awareness. Consciousness and Cognition, 13(2), 241-253
[25]David T. Brookes, Eugenia Etkina.(2007). Using conceptual metaphor and functional grammar to explore how language used in physics affects student learning.[physics.ed-ph]., 1319(10),1-10
[26]David Waison. (2005). Positive Affective. Edited By C.R.Snyder Shane J. Lopez.Handbook of Posychology(pp.106-117). Oxford university press
[27]Diane Gillespie.Misreading Charlie. (2005). Interpreting a Teaching Story Through Metaphor Analysis. McGill Journal of Education. Montreal, Winter, 40(1), 13
[28]Evan Heit, Brett K.Hayes. (2005). Relations Among Categorization, Induction, Recognition,and Similarity: Comment on Sloutsky and Fishe, Journal of Experimental Psychology General, 134(4),595-605
[29]Francois J. Sirois. (2008). Aesthetic experience, int J Psychoanal 89,127-142
[30]Faust and Chiarello, M. Faust and C. Chiarello, (1998). Sentence context and lexical ambiguity resolution by the two hemispheres,Neuropsychologia,36(9),827-835.
[31]Forgas,J.P.(1995).Mood and judgment:The Affect Infusion Model(AIM).Psychological Bulletin,117,39-66.
[32]Gil-PerezD,CarrascosaJ.(1990).What to do about science "misconceptions".Science Education,74,531-5401
[33]Giora et al.,R.Giora,E.Zaidel,N.Soroker,G.Batori and A.Kasher.(2003).Differential effects of right- and left-hemisphere damage on understanding sarcasm and metaphor,Metaphor and Symbol,1(1&2),63-83.
[34]Helmut Leder,Benno Belke,Andries Oeberst,Dorothee Augustin.(2004).A model of aesthetic appreciation and aesthetic judgments.London:British Journal of Psychology,95(11),489-519
[35]Johnson,Mark.(1987).The Body in the Mind:the Bodily Basis of Meaning,Reason and Imagination.Chicago:University of Chicago Press
[36]Jonassen,D.H.(1981).Content treatment interactions:a better design model.Paper presented at the Association for Educational Communication and Technology,Philadelphia,PA,4:7
[37]Konecni,V J.,& Sargent-Pollok,D.(1977).Arousal,positive and negative affect,and preference for renaissance and 20th century paintings.Motivation and Emotion,1,75-93
[38]Lakoff & Johnson.(1980).Metaphors we live by,the university of Chicago Press,185-194,223-225
[39]M.Rapp,Dirk T.Leube,Michael Erb,Wolfgang Grodd and Tilo TJ.Kirche.(2000).Laterality in metaphor processing:Lack of evidence from functional magnetic resonance imaging for the right hemisphere theory.Brain and Language,100(2),142-149.
[40]Mark Girod,David Wong.(2002).An aesthetic(Deweyan) perspective on science learning:Case studies of tree fourth graders.The elementary School Journal.Chicago,102(3),199
[41]Marks & Bomstein,L.E.Marks and M.H.Bomstein.(1987).Sensory similarities:Classes,characteristics,and cognitive consequences.In:R.E.Haskell,Editor,Symbolic structures:The psychology of metaphoric transformation,Ablex,Norwood,NJ,49-65
[42]Marks L.E.Marks.(1996).On perceptual metaphors,Metaphor and Symbolic Activity,1:39-66
[43]Marks,Hammeal,& Bornstein Marks,L.E.,Hammeal,R.J.,& Bornstein,M.H.(1987).Perceiving similarity and comprehending metaphor.Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development,52(1),serial no.215
[44]Markus F.Peschl.(1993).Knowledge representation in cognitive systems and science:In search of a new foundation for philosophy of science from a neurocomputational and evolutionary perspective of cognition Journal of Social and Evolutionary Systems,16(2),181-182
[45]Marschark,Everhart,Martin,& West M.Marschark,V.S.Everhart,J.Martin and S.A.West.(1987).Identifying linguistic creativity in deaf and hearing children,Metaphor and Symbolic Activity 2,4,281-306
[46]Martin Cortazzi and Lixian Jin.(2003). Bridges to learning Metaphors of teaching, learning and language.见 Lynne Cameron, Graham Low, Editor .Rearching and applying metaphor, (pp. 176)剑桥大学出版社授权上海外语教育出版社
[47]Mashal et al., N. Mashal, M. Faust, T. Hendler and M. Jung-Beeman. (2005). The role of the right hemisphere in processing nonsalient metaphorical meanings: application of princupal component analysis to fMRI data, Neuropsychologia, 43,2084-2100
[48]Matthew S. McGlone. (2007). What is the explanatory value of a conceptual metaphor?Language & Communication, 27(2), 109-126
[49]Maureen O'Hara. (2007). Strangers in a strange land: Knowing, learning and education for the global knowledge society. Futures, 39(8), 930-941
[50] Mayer J D, Caruso D R, Salovey P. (2000). Emotional intelligence meets traditional standards for an intelligence. Intelligence, 24,267-298
[51]Mayer J D, Salovey P, Caruso D R. (2000). Models of emotional intelligence. In: Robert J.Sternberg ed. Handbook of intelligence. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, ,394-420
[52]Mayer, R. A. The instructive metaphor: Metaphoric aids to students' understanding of science.In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (pp. 561-578).New York: Cambridge University Press,1993,2
[53]Mitchell and T.J. Crow. (2005). Right hemisphere language functions and schizophrenia: the forgotten hemisphere? Brain, 128, 963-978
[54]Mary Ehrenworth, Linda D Labbo. (2003). Literacy and the aesthetic experience: Engaging children with the visual arts in the teaching of writing. Language Arts. 81 (1) , 43
[55]N. Mashal, M. Faust, T. Hendler and M. Jung-Beeman. (2007). An fMRI investigation of the neural correlates underlying the processing of novel metaphoric expressions. Brain and Language,100(2), 115-126
[56]Oliveri et al., M. Oliveri, L. Romero and C. Papagno. (2004). Left but not right temporal involvement in opaque idiom comprehension: a repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation study, Journal of cognitive Neuroscience, 16, 848-855
[57]Papagno and Carporali, C. Papagno and A. Carporali. (2007). Testing idiom comprehension in aphasic patients: The effects of task and idiom type, Brain and Language , 100,208-220
[58]Posner, G J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W, Gertzog, W. A..(1982).Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66,211-227
[59]R.L. Mitchell and T.J. Crow. (2005). Right hemisphere language functions and schizophrenia:the forgotten hemisphere? Brain, 128,963-978
[60]Rademacher et al., 1992 J. Rademacher, A.M. Galaburda, D.N.Jay A. Seitz. (2005). The neural, evolutionary, developmental, and bodily basis of metaphor.New Ideas in Psychology, 23(2),74-95
[61]Ramachandran & Hubbard V.S. Ramachandran and E.M. Hubbard. (2001).Synaethesia—A window into perception, thought, and language, Journal of Consciousness Studies,12(8),33-34.Cited By in Scopus(81)
[62]Ramachandran & Hubbard V.S.Ramachandran and E.M.Hubbard.(2001).Psychophysical investigations into the neural basis of synaesthesia,Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B,268,979-983
[63]Rapp et al.,A.M.Rapp,D.T.Leube,M.Erb,W.Grodd and T.T.J.Kircher.(2004).Neural correlates of metaphor processing,Cognitive Brain Research,20,395-402
[64]Reese,Debbie Denise.(2003).Metaphor and Content:An Embodied Paradigm for Learning.博士学位论文.美国大学硕博论文数据库,50-65
[65]Robert S.Root-Bemstein.(2002).Aesthetic cognition.International Studies In The Philosophy Of Science,16(1),61-76
[66]Ruben Coronel.(2007).Myths,metaphors,and mathematical models.Heart Rhythm,4(8),1046-1047
[67]Sigmund Freud.(1914).Psychopathology of Everyday Life[Electronic version],Originally published in London by T.Fisher Unwin,http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Freud/Psycho/chap6.htm.2008-6-3
[68]Schon D.(1979).Generative metaphor:A perspective on Problem Solving in Social Policy.In:Ortony A.Metaphor and Thought New York:Cambridge University Press
[69]Searle J.(1979).Metaphor.In Ortony A(Ed.),Metaphor and Thought.见周榕.时间隐喻表征研究.博士学位论文.西南师范大学.2000
[70]Shierry Weber Nicholsen.(2006).Aesthetic experience:Beauty,creativity,and the search for the ideal.International Journa of Psychoanalysis.London,87(6),1737-1741
[71]Sotillo et al.,M.Sotillo,L.Carretie,J.A.Hinojosa,M.Tapia,F.Mercado and S.Lopez-Martin et al..(2005).Neural activity associated with metaphor comprehension:spatial analysis,Neuroscience Letters,373,5-9
[72]Ted Cohen.(1978).Metaphor and the Cultivation of Intimacy by On Metaphor,ed.By Sheldon,The University of Chicago Press,1
[73]Taylor J R.(1989).Linguistic Categorization.Prototypes in Linguistic theory(2nd ed.).Oxford Basil Blackwell,59-80
[74]Winner and Gardner,E.Winner and H.Gardner.(1977).The comprehension of metaphor in brain-damaged patients,Brain,100,17-729
[75]W-M.Roth and D.Lawless.(2002).Scientific investigations,metaphorical gestures,and the emergence of abstract scientific concepts Learning and Instruction,12(3),285-304
[76][美]艾娜.阿伦特著.(2006).姜志辉译.南京:江苏教育出版社,112-116
[77][苏]A.A.别利亚耶夫,JI.U.诺维科娃,B.U.托尔斯特赫.(1993).美学词典.汤侠生,冯申,高叔媚等译,北京:东方出版社.549
[78][法]保罗·利科著.(2004).活的隐喻.汪堂家译.上海:上海译文出版社,59-109,154
[79][美]保罗·法伊尔阿本德.(2005).自由社会中的科学.兰征译.上海:上海译文出版社,1
[80]邦弗尼斯特.语言的形式与意义.(1966).1966年法语哲学协会第13次会议会刊,载<语言>,日内瓦,拉巴科尼埃尔出版社,1967:38.见自法国保罗·利科著.活的隐喻(pp.80,187)汪堂家译.上海译文出版社
[81][英]鲍桑葵(B.Bosanquet)(2004).美学史.张今译.桂林:广西师范大学出版社,343
[82][美]阿恩海姆 霍兰 蔡尔德.(2005).艺术的心理世界.周宪译.中国人民大学出版社,15
[83][英]C.W.Valentin.(1987).实验审美心理学.潘智彪译.三环出版社,9
[84]E·H·伊格纳奇耶夫编.(1962).小学儿童心理学(论文集)中“思维”一章(中译本),人民教育出版社.引自朱智贤,林崇德.(1986).思维发展心理学.北京师范大学出版社,1986,470-471
[85][奥地利]恩斯特·马赫.(2006.).知识与谬误——探究心理学论纲..翟飚,郭东编译.重庆:重庆出版社,93-97
[86][美]国家研究理事会科学及技术教育中心《国家科学教育标准》科学探究附属读物编委会.(2004).罗星凯译.科学普及出版社,113
[87]黑格尔.(2006版).美学(第一卷).朱光潜译.北京:商务印书馆,166-167、357-360
[88][美]H.Lynn Erickson.(2003).概念为本的课程与教学.兰英译.北京:中国轻工业出版社,10
[89]J·皮亚杰,R·加西亚.(2005).走向一种意义的逻辑.李其维译.上海华东师范大出版社,21-23.
[90]J·皮亚杰,B·英海尔德著.(1980).儿童心理学.吴福元译.商务印书馆,35-40
[91]J·H·弗拉维尔,P·H·米勒,S·A·米勒.(2002).认知发展(第四版).华东师范大学出版社,7,8,346
[92]J·R·安德森.(1989).认知心理学.吉林教育出版社,168
[93]杜威.(1990).民主主义与教育.北京:人民教育出版社,279-280
[94][俄]列夫·谢苗诺维奇·维果茨基著.(1997).李维译.思维与语言.杭州:浙江教育出版社,52-96
[95][英]卡尔·皮尔逊.(1999).科学的规范.北京:华夏出版社,15
[96][意]克罗齐.(2007).作为表现科学和一般语言学的美学的理论.田时纲译.北京:中国社会科学出版社,38-40
[97][英]李斯托威尔著.(1979).近代美学史述评.蒋孔阳译.合肥:安徽教育出版社,2007版,27
[98][苏].M.C.卡冈主编.(1987).马克思主义美学史.北京:北京大学出版社,20-21
[99]Michale F.D.Yong主编.(2002).知识与控制——教育社会学探新.谢维和、朱旭东译.华东师范大学出版社,76-77,10
[100][美]鲁道夫·阿恩海姆.(2005).抽象语言与隐喻.收录于周宪译.艺术的心理世界(pp.61).中国人民大学出版社
[101][美]欧内斯特·内格尔著.(2005).科学的结构.徐向东译.上海:上海译文出版社,120-121
[102][英]洛克.(2003).论人的知解力.见朱光潜.美学(pp.205).商务印书馆
[103][美]Marilee Sprenger.(2005).Learing & Memory:The Brain in Action.北京 师范大学“认知神经科学与学习”国家重点实验室脑科学与教育应用研究中心译.北京:中国轻工业出版社,50
[104][美]R.M.加涅.(1999).学习的条件和教学论.皮连生等译.上海:华东师范大学出版社,132-133
[105][苏]A.A.别利亚耶夫,JI.U.诺维科娃,B.U.托尔斯特赫.(1993).美学词典.汤侠生,冯申,高叔媚等译,北京:东方出版社,549
[106]S.Lan.Robertson.(2004).问题解决心理学.张奇等译.北京:中国轻工业出版社,125-152
[107]圣·托马斯·阿奎那.(1984).神学大全.第一卷第五章第四节.见朱光潜美学文集(pp.137)第四卷.上海文艺出版社
[108]S.P帕克主编.(1996).物理百科全书.北京:科学出版社,818
[109][英]托·亨·赫胥黎.(2005).科学与教育.单中惠、平波译.北京:人民教育出版社,20-21,122
[110][美]V.C.奥尔布里奇.(1986).艺术哲学.陈孟辉译.中国社会科学出版社,31
[111][苏]瓦·费·阿斯穆斯著.(1987).康德.孙鼎国译.北京:北京大学出版社,399
[112]安军,郭贵春.(2005).科学隐喻的本质.科学技术与辨证法,6,42-47
[113]白丽芳.(2004).儿童隐喻性思维特点及发展研究.外语与外语教学,4,53-57
[114]陈新葵,莫雷,张积家.(2006).隐喻在文章语境中的理解——概念隐喻理论探讨.心理科学,29(1),14-17
[115]陈勇.(2005).原型人物在英语空间性状概念隐喻中的认知分析.外语与外语教学,5:17-19.
[116]陈英和.(1992).关于儿童青少年获得几何概念认知操作的发展研究.博士学位论文.北京师范大学,31-32
[117]陈磊.(2007).重读科学家钱学森科学与艺术是如何联姻的.http://sci.ce.cn.中国经济网-科技频道—人物新闻,2007年12月11日阅读
[118]陈大柔.(2007).艺术与科学整合的依据和中介.2007年12月中国科学、艺术(审美)、创新:跨学科理论与研究方法高峰论坛论文集(西南大学高等教育研究所图书室藏),19-33
[119]车文博主编.(2001).当代西方心理学新词典.长春:吉林人民出版社,333-334
[120]曹新美,刘翔平,蒋曦拧,王铮芳.(2007).积极心理学中流畅感理论评介.心理学人大复印资料,(10),12-16
[121]丁祖荫.(1980).儿童概念掌握的实验研究.发展心理、教育心理论文选.北京:人民教育出版社
[122]丁晓君,周昌乐.(2006).审美的神经机制研究及其美学意义.心理科学,29(5),1247-1249
[123]佟秀丽,莫雷,ZheChen.(2005).国外儿童科学思维发展的新探索.心理科学,28(4),933-936.
[124]董学文.美学概论.(2004).北京:北京大学出版社,149
[125]冯晓虎.隐喻:思维的基础,篇章的框架.(2004).北京:对外经济贸易大学出版社,64
[126]冯忠良.(1999).结构化与定向化教学心理学原理.北京:北京师范大学出版社,238-248
[127]冯其庸主编.(2004).中国艺术百科辞典.北京:商务印书馆,545
[128]费多益.(2007).认知研究的现象学趋向.哲学动态,6:55-62
[129]樊琪.(2001).自然科学概念形成过程中外显与内隐学习的比较.心理科学,24(6),676-678
[130]樊琪.(2002).科学学习心理学——科学课程的教与学.北京:中国轻工业出版社,155.
[131]樊琪.(2007).美感及其结构的心理测量学分析.2007年12月中国科学、艺术(审美)、创新:跨学科理论与研究方法高峰论坛论文集(西南大学高等教育研究所图书室藏),68-75
[132]高天.(2007).音乐治疗学基础理论.北京:世界图书出版社,4,40-43
[133]高敏.(2008).高考演练语文考新词”拼生活”是啥意思.重庆时报,2008年4月18日.18
[134]顾建华、张占国.(1999).美学与美育词典.北京:学苑出版社,45,239
[135]郭成,赵伶俐著.(1998).美育心理学:让教与学充满美感和生机.北京:警官教育出版社
[136]黄希庭主编.(2004).简明心理学词典.合肥:安徽人民出版社,244
[137]胡壮麟.(2004).认知隐喻学.北京:北京大学出版社,1.
[138]胡文飞.(2007).解读电影片名翻译中的概念隐喻.电影评介,12,57
[139]胡家祥.(2005).审美学,北京:北京大学出版社,114
[140]华东师范大学数学系编.(1991).数学分析(第二版)(上册),北京:高等教育出版社,3
[141]黄华.(2001).试比较概念隐喻理论和概念整合理论.外语与外语教学,6,20-22,34
[142]黄祖江.(2002).谈汉语表示“愤怒”的概念隐喻.西南民族学院学报(哲学社会科学版),6
[143]黄敏,刘培玉.(2000).修辞与语法的交融地带:概念隐喻.修辞学习,3,9
[144]黄华新,王继同.(2005).新逻辑学.浙江大学出版社,104
[145]黄海澄.(1984).论形式美.广西师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版),1,39-48
[146]汉语辞海(彩图版).(2003).北京:北京教育出版社,2296
[147]华东师范大学数学系编.(1991).数学分析(第二版)(上册).北京:高等教育出版社,3
[148]敬仕超主编.(2004).物理学导论.北京:科学出版社,75
[149]蒋济永.(1997).“意义”的审美综合——论体验美学的审美感知方式和特点.社会科学家,6,35-41
[150]孔智光著.(2002).中西古典美学研究.济南:山东大学出版社,148-155
[151]卢植,孟智君.(2004).英汉概念隐喻的认知语言学分析.华南师范大学学报(社会科学版),(3),71-74
[152]刘宁生.(1992).我们赖以生存的隐喻节译.修辞学习,67
[153]刘承宇.(2005).关于韩礼德概念隐喻的再思考.外语教学与研究,4,89-293
[154]刘宇红.(2004).关于韩礼德概念隐喻的再思考四川外语学院学报,9,84-86
[155]刘邦凡.(2005).论现代归纳逻辑的科学认知功能.科学技术与工程,8,487-490
[156]刘仲林.(2002).科学臻美方法.北京:科学出版社,184
[157]刘兆吉.(1993).美育心理研究.成都:四川教育出版社,73
[158]刘忠学.(2006).小学生的前概念与科学教学.科学课,10(上半月),14-17
[159]刘玉琏,傅沛仁.(1992).数学分析讲义(第三版)(上册).北京:高等教育出版社,6
[160]罗晓燕,葛俊丽.(2007).商务用途英语中的概念隐喻认知机制.商场现代化,14,7-8
[161]林崇德.(2007).思维心理学研究的几点回顾.心理学人大复印资料,2,1-8
[162]林崇德.(2003).学习与发展(修订版)北京:.北京师范大学出版社,449
[163]李勇忠,李春华.(2001).认知语境与概念隐喻.外语与外语教学,6,26-28
[164]李维清.(2004).论隐喻的基本类型及认知功能.US-China Foreign Language,2,63-64.
[165]李天道主编.(2006).美育与美育心理.北京:中国社会科学出版社,359-363
[166]李志宏.(2003).中国美学的现代性进展与科学化方向.吉林大学社会科学学报,1,5-10
[167]李红、雪梅、吴睿敏.(2004).儿童青少年审美心理的发展与美育对策.重庆:西南师范大学出版社,3
[168]李善良.(2005).论正例和反例对数学概念学习的影响.中学教研(数学)9,1-3
[169]李敬敏.(1989).美学原理基础.北京:团结出版社,36-37
[170]雷纳特·N·凯恩,杰弗里·凯恩著.(2004).创设联结:教学与人脑.吕林海译,高文审校.华东师范大学出版社,2
[171]鲁晨光.(2003).美感奥妙和需求进化.合肥:中国科学技术大学出版社,31
[172]聂亚宁.(2001).Beyond的中心——边缘意象图式和空间概念隐喻意义初探.外语与外语教学,2
[173]李其维.(2006).破解“智慧胚胎学”之迷——皮亚杰的发生认识论.湖北教育出版社,
[174]刘兵.2007).艺术与科学之关系的层次与相应的研究定位.2007年12月中国科学、艺术(审美)、创新:跨学科理论与研究方法高峰论坛论文集,15-18
[175]马克思.(1979).1844年哲学-经济学手稿.刘丕坤译.北京:人民出版社,79-80
[176]梅德明,高文成.(2006).以《老子》为语料的概念隐喻认知研究.外语学刊,3,42-46.
[177]母小勇,张莉华.(2000).一个科学概念形成过程的初步实验研究.心理科学,23(5):620-621
[178]孟昭兰编.(2005).情绪心理学.北京:北京大学出版社,97
[179]马千里编.(1987).论学习科学.高教文摘编辑部(高教文摘特种本),161
[180]毛萍.(1991).人的自我意识与美感.湘潭大学社会科学学报,1982,1.见赵伶俐.人生价值的宏扬——当代美育新论.四川教育出版社.78
[181]彭吉象.(2000).中国艺术学.北京:高等教育出版社,192
[182]皮埃尔·丰塔尼埃.(2004).话语的形象化表达.第99页,转引自法国保罗·利科著.活的隐喻.汪堂家译.上海译文出版社,80.187
[183]钱学森.(2006).交叉科学:理论和研究的展望.见刘仲林主编.中国交叉科学.北京:科学出版社,14-16
[184]邱林,郑雪.(2005).主观幸福感的结构及其与人格特质的关系.应用心理学,4:330-335
[185]杨树子.(2006).科学人文,和而不同.见刘仲林主编.中国交叉科学(PP.21).北京:科学出版社
[186]齐振海、覃修贵.(2004).隐喻词语的范畴化研究,6,24-28
[187]邱章乐.(2004).思维命题与测量.中国文史出版社,25.
[188]仇丽君.(2006).在《教学中引入前概念测试》一文中的提问方式.科学课(小学版).12(上半月):50-51
[189]任绍曾.(2006).概念隐喻及其语篇体现——对体现概念隐喻的语篇的多维分析.外语与外语教学,2,91-99
[190]R.J.斯腾伯格.(2000).超越IQ——人类智力的三元理论.俞晚林,吴国宏译.华东师范大学出版社,165-166
[191]谌莉文.(2006).概念隐喻与委婉语隐喻意义构建的认知理据.外语与外语教学,8.17-20
[192]邵志芳.(2006).概念的多重表征形式极其双极结构模型.华东师范大学学报(教育科学版),12,47-561
[193]唐小俊.(2008).促进概念转变的教学策略研究.教育探索,6,11-12
[194]滕守尧.(1998).审美心理描述.四川人民出版社,9,29-43,76-78.
[195]文旭,叶狂.(2003).概念隐喻的系统性和连贯性.外语学刊,3
[196]王勤玲.(2005).概念隐喻理论与概念整合理论的对比研究外语学刊,1,42-46
[197]王子春.(2005).两类原型理论及其相似性.西南农业大学学报(社会科学版),2,139-141
[198]王宁.(2000).中国文化概论.长沙:湖南师范大学出版社,213-216
[199]汪少华,徐键.(2002).通感与概念隐喻.外语学刊,3,91-112
[200]汪少华,郑守疆.(2000).从合成空间理论看隐喻的意义建构.解放军外国语学院学报,6,7-11
[201]汪堂家.(2004).隐喻诠释学:修辞学与哲学的联姻——从利科的隐喻理论谈起,哲学研究.9:76
[202]吴庆麟等.(2005).认知教学心理学.上海科学技术出版社,1132
[203]伍新春,张爱芹.(2006).试论概念图及其对科学教育的启示.心理发展与教育,3,116-119
[204]薛忆沩.(2000).深圳大学学报(人文社会科学版).概盒隐喻理论与汉文化研究,2,32-36
[205]薛亿沩.(1996).概念隐喻理论与汉语.博士学位论文.国家图书馆藏
[206]徐纪敏.(1987).科学美学思想史.长沙:湖南人民出版社,2.
[207]于建平.(2006).概念隐喻:实现科技英语语篇语体特征的有效途径.中国科技翻译,2,40-43
[208]俞国良,董妍.(2007).情绪对学习不良青少年选择性注意和持续性注意的影响.心理学(人大复印资料),10,45
[209]语言大典.(1990).海口:三环出版社,1526
[210]亚里斯多德.(2005).诗学.上海:上海人民出版,74-77
[211]亚里斯多德.(2005).修辞学.上海:上海人民出版社,194
[212]燕国材.(1986).论学习科学.教育评论.6
[213]严标宾,郑雪,邱林.(2004).主观幸福感研究综述.自然辨证法通讯,2,96-110
[214]赵艳芳.(2005).认知语言学概论.上海:上海外语教育出版社,26
[215]周榕,黄希庭.(1999).隐喻理解加工机制的研究.心理学动态,19-22.
[216]周榕、黄希庭.(2000).时间隐喻表征的跨文化研究.心理科学,23(2),141-145
[217]周榕、黄希庭.(2001).时间隐喻的语义层次网络模型研究.心理科学,24(2),163-168
[218]周榕,黄希庭.(2001).儿童时间隐喻表征能力的发展研究.心理科学,2
[219]周榕.时间隐喻表征研究.(2000).博士学位论文,西南师范大学,29
[220]周宪.(2000).20世纪西方美学.南京大学出版社,47-50
[221]周至禹.(2006).形态与分析.哈尔滨:黑龙江美术出版社,8
[222]张永莉.(2007).概念隐喻在英语教学中的认知力研究.教学与管理,4,94-95
[223]张玉能.(2006).美的规律与审美活动.美学.人大复印资料,1,18-25
[224]章婷.(2007).汉语时间概念隐喻的认知分析.齐鲁学刊,1,88-91
[225]曾蕾.(2003).论系统功能语法中“投射”概念隐喻句构及其语义特征现代外语,4,351-357
[226]朱智贤,林崇德.(1986).思维发展心理学.北京:北京师范大学出版社,471-482
[227]朱智贤.(1999).儿童心理学.北京:人民教育出版社,499
[228]朱智贤.(1987).见赵艳芳.认知语言学(pp.2).上海:上海外语教育出版社,2005.2
[229]朱志荣.(2004).康德美学思想研究.合肥:安徽人民出版社,64-74
[230]朱学庆.(2002).概念图的知识及其研究综述.上海教育科研,10,31-34
[231]朱光潜.(2003).西方美学史.人民文学出版社,123,209,195,411
[232]赵伶俐.(2002).视点结构教学技术原理.百家出版社,序3-4页,8,33-43,111-139
[233]赵伶俐.(1991).人生价值的弘扬——当代美育新论.成都:四川教育出版社,63-81,79,151,177-178
[234]赵伶俐.(1993).美育心理研究.成都:四川教育出版社
[235]赵伶俐.(1999).论美感增力性的生理和心理基础.西南师范大学学报(哲社版),4,44-49
[236]赵伶俐.(2002).审美概念学习效应与迁移的逻辑线路探究.心理科学,(1)
[237]赵伶俐.(2002).审美概念理解对于创造性思维作业成绩的影响.心理科学,25(6),649-652
[238]赵伶俐.(2003).发展交叉学科:21世纪高等学校创新的主题和难题.现代大学教育,4
[239]赵伶俐,潘丽.“九五”规划国家教委重点项目“学校美育系统与美育心理发展研究”简报第13期第3页,现为西南大学高等教育研究所资料室藏
[240]赵伶俐.(2003).多值逻辑与审美逻辑——论审美认知的逻辑基础,西南师范大学学报,2,22-27
[241]赵伶俐.(2004).审美概念认知——科学阐释与实证.北京:新华出版社.14,17,22,44,61-70,162
[242]赵伶俐.(2007).艺术意象·审美意象·科学意象——创造活动心理图像异同的理论与实证构想.自然辨证法通讯,7,104-110
[243]哲学大辞典(逻辑学卷).(1988).上海辞书出版社,480
[244]查有梁.(2007).创新:科学与艺术的融合.2007年12月中国科学、艺术(审美)、创新:跨学科理论与研究方法高峰论坛论文集,19-33,34-58
[245]曾繁仁.(2003).美学之思.山东:山东大学出版社,574
[246]曾繁仁.(2001).美育与脑科学初探.文史哲,(4),64-69
[247]赵军.(2006).对高中生“极限”概念认知状况的调查研究.硕士学位论文.华中师范大 学.CNKI优秀博士硕士论文库
[248]中国大百科全书(音乐、舞蹈卷).(1992).北京:中国大百科全书出版社
[249]钟杰、钱铭怡.(2005).中文情绪形容词检测表的编制与信效度研究.中国临床心理学杂志,1(13),9-13
[250]钟子翱,黄安祯.(1984).刘勰论协作之道.北京:长征出版社,368
[251]张大均.(2005).教育心理学.北京:人民教育出版社