老年期与高龄期人群主观轻信性自评与欺骗识别能力之间的关系
- 作者: Nikishina V.B.1, Petrash E.A.1, Lisichkina A.A.1, Kucheryavenko I.A.2
-
隶属关系:
- Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University
- Belgorod National Research University
- 期: 卷 32, 编号 10 (2025)
- 页面: 745-755
- 栏目: ORIGINAL STUDY ARTICLES
- URL: https://journals.rcsi.science/1728-0869/article/view/356886
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.17816/humeco686297
- EDN: https://elibrary.ru/rzsdpj
- ID: 356886
如何引用文章
全文:
详细
论证。研究的现实意义在于:一方面,全球多数国家社会人口结构中老年期与高龄期人群比例持续上升;另一方面,针对该人群的犯罪数量亦逐年增加,尤其是基于电话通讯的诈骗行为。
目的。探讨老年期与高龄期个体主观轻信性自评与欺骗识别能力之间的关系。
方法。研究在Russian Clinical and Research Center of Gerontology开展,共分三个阶段:评估实际欺骗识别能力;评估主观轻信性自评;分析两者之间的关联。样本共60名受试者:老年期36人(60–75岁),高龄期24人(76–90岁)。纳入标准包括:认知状态完整、无严重慢性躯体与精神疾病、感觉系统功能保留、无脑血流障碍病史。采用MoCA测试、Pragmatic Interpretation Short Stories Winner’s Task (Kolesova和Sergienko改编版)、Dembo-Rubinstein方法及Russell、Peplau、Ferguson主观孤独感量表。定量评估采用描述性、比较性、相关性及多变量统计方法。
结果。在对老年与高龄人群主观轻信程度与欺骗识别能力之间关系进行评估后,未发现统计学显著关联。然而因素分析显示,约40%的受试者对自身欺骗识别能力存在错误判断,与其实际识别水平无关。
结论。老年期与高龄期人群在欺骗识别能力上表现接近。该年龄阶段欺骗识别能力较低与较高的轻信倾向以及对自身认知能力较低的主观评价相关。
作者简介
Vera B. Nikishina
Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University
Email: nikishina_vb@rsmu.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-2421-3652
SPIN 代码: 6779-0519
Dr. Sci. (Psychology), Professor
俄罗斯联邦, MoscowEkaterina A. Petrash
Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University
Email: petrash@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-3177-088X
SPIN 代码: 2313-1089
Dr. Sci. (Psychology), Associate Professor
俄罗斯联邦, MoscowAlyona A. Lisichkina
Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University
编辑信件的主要联系方式.
Email: liss_alyona@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0009-0000-8276-0940
SPIN 代码: 1720-9044
俄罗斯联邦, Moscow
Igor A. Kucheryavenko
Belgorod National Research University
Email: kucheryavenko@bsuedu.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-0226-0389
SPIN 代码: 9220-1544
Cand. Sci. (Psychology), Assistant Professor
俄罗斯联邦, Belgorod参考
- Kalabikhina IE, Kalmykova NM, Denisov BP, et al. Demography: an electronic textbook. Moscow: Faculty of Economics, Lomonosov Moscow State University; 2022. 560 р. (In Russ.) URL: https://books.econ.msu.ru/Demography/
- Premack D, Woodruff G. Does the chimpanzee have a theory of mind? Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 1978;1(4):515–526. doi: 10.1017/s0140525x00076512
- Sergienko EA, Ulanova AYu, Lebedeva EI. Model of the mental: Structure and dynamics. Moscow: Institute of Psychology of the Russian Academy of Sciences; 2020. 503 р. (In Russ.) ISBN: 978-5-9270-0420-1
- Nasreddine ZS, Phillips NA, Bédirian V, et al. The montreal cognitive assessment, MoCA: a brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2005;53(4):695–699. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2005.53221.x
- Winner E, Leekam S, Brownell H, et al. Distinguishing lies from jokes: theory of mind deficits and discourse interpretation in right hemisphere brain-damaged patients. Brain Lang. 1998;62(1):89–106. doi: 10.1006/brln.1997.1889
- Melehin AI. Specificity of understanding of deception at presenile and senile age. Psychology and Law. 2019;9(4):187–210. doi: 10.17759/psylaw.2019090414 EDN: KVQCSA
- Bottiroli S, Cavallini E, Ceccato I, et al. Theory of mind in aging: comparing cognitive and affective components in the faux pas test. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2016;62:152–162. doi: 10.1016/j.archger.2015.09.009
- Bernstein DM, Coolin A, Fischer AL, et al. False-belief reasoning from 3 to 92 years of age. PLoS One. 2017;12(9):e0185345. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0185345
补充文件




