Effects of coping and cooperative instructions on guiltyand informed innocents physiological respon

Effects of coping and cooperative instructions on guilty and informed innocents'physiological responses to concealed information ☆

Liza Zvi a ,b ,Israel Nachson a ,c ,Eitan Elaad b ,?

a Bar-Ilan University,Ramat Gan,Israel

b Ariel University Center,Ariel,Israel

c

Ashkelon Academic College,Ashkelon,Israel

a b s t r a c t

a r t i c l e i n f o Article history:

Received 28June 2011

Received in revised form 26January 2012Accepted 27January 2012

Available online 11February 2012Keywords:

Concealed Information Test Polygraph

Skin conductance response Respiration Finger pulse

Detection of deception

Previous research on the Concealed Information Test indicates that knowledge of the critical information of a given event is suf ?cient for the elicitation of strong physiological reactions,thus facilitating detection by the test.Other factors that affect the test's ef ?cacy are deceptive verbal responses to the test's questions and motiva-tion of guilty examinees to avoid detection.In the present study effects of coping and cooperative instructions —delivered to guilty and innocent participants —on detection were examined.In a mock-theft experiment guilty participants who actually committed a mock-crime,and informed innocent participants who handled the critical items of the crime in an innocent context,were instructed to adopt either a coping or a cooperative attitude toward the polygraph test.Results indicated that both,guilt and coping behavior,were associated with enhanced physiological responses to the critical information,whereas innocence and cooperative behavior attenuated physiological responses.Theoretical and applied implications of the results are discussed.

?2012Elsevier B.V.All rights reserved.

1.Introduction

The Concealed Information Test (CIT),also known as the Guilty Knowledge Test (GKT)(e.g.,Lykken,1959),is a psychophysiological technique for detection of concealed information.It utilizes a series of multiple-choice questions,each having one correct (e.g.,a feature of the crime under investigation)and several incorrect (control)alternatives,chosen so that an innocent suspect who has no crime-related knowledge cannot discriminate among them (Lykken,1998).Typically,if the suspect's physiological responses to the critical alterna-tives are consistently larger than to the controls,knowledge about the event in question is inferred.

Early accounts (e.g.Lykken,1974)explained the enhanced responsivity to critical items of information with the orienting re ?ex (OR).The OR is a complex of behavioral and physiological reactions elicited to a novel or personally signi ?cant stimulus (Sokolov,1963).According to Sokolov (1963),during repeated processing of sensory information a mental model of the surrounding world is being gradually built.Any new incoming sensory information is matched with that model.An incoming novel stimulus,which does

not match the existing mental model,elicits an OR.According to Gati and Ben-Shakhar (1990)a signi ?cant stimulus which matches a prior mental representation also elicits an OR.This notion has been recently repeated by Verschuere and Ben-Shakhar (2011).

However,reservations have been raised regarding the dual nature of the OR and the assumption that it is the sole mechanism underlying the CIT (e.g.,Verschuere et al.,2007).Verschuere et al.(2007)argued that inhibition of arousal may play a more prominent role than OR in accounting for the responses in the CIT.Thus,guilty suspects who recognize the critical item as associated with the crime in question,try to inhibit the physiological arousal that accompanies the OR which in turn enhances their physiological responses rather than attenuate them.

The idea that signi ?cance triggers an OR,and the reasoning that it is associated with an attempt to inhibit arousal,endow both factors with the potential to be the underlying mechanisms of physiological responses to concealed information.

According to Lykken (1974),only guilty suspects possess crime-related information.Therefore,only their responses to the critical items are expected to be stronger than to the control alternatives.For innocent suspects without this particular knowledge,all answers are equivalent in signi ?cance,and therefore elicit non-systematic responses.Lykken's cognitive approach emphasizes the individual's knowledge and recognition rather than his or her emotions,act of deception or motivation to deceive.Support for the cognitive approach may be obtained from ?ndings demonstrating how crime-related infor-mation is detected under conditions where no motivational instructions

International Journal of Psychophysiology 84(2012)140–148

☆This paper is based on a doctoral dissertation conducted by the ?rst author which is about to be submitted to the Department of Criminology,Bar-Ilan University.The study was conducted at Ariel University Center.

?Corresponding author.Tel./fax:+97225865634.E-mail address:elaad@https://www.doczj.com/doc/0619087861.html,.il (E.

Elaad).0167-8760/$–see front matter ?2012Elsevier B.V.All rights reserved.doi:

10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2012.01.022

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

International Journal of Psychophysiology

j o u r n a l h o m e p a ge :w w w.e l s e v i e r.c o m/l o c a t e /i j p s y c h o

are delivered to the examinees and with no verbal responses to the test's questions(see Ben-Shakhar and Elaad(2003)for a review).

However,the assumption that only guilty suspects possess crime-related information raises a few questions.Real-life polygraph tests are usually conducted weeks and even months after the execution of the criminal act,and during this period the suspects might receive information about the crime from various sources.For example, crime-related information might leak through mass media or internet descriptions of the crime,through contact with other people who may have some knowledge of the crime and even through the behavior and verbalizations of the interrogator.As long as the innocent suspects can explain how they became aware of the critical information,the problem is not severe.However,it is possible that they are unaware of their exposure to that information and cannot consequently account for its sources.Furthermore,in some cases knowledgeable but innocent witnesses to a crime might refuse to admit their knowledge because of fear of reprisal by the culprit.

Several studies have addressed the issue of leakage of crime-related information in the CIT.Early research on innocent participants who were exposed to crime-related information in an innocent context has shown that it is possible to distinguish between them and the guilty participants who actually committed the crime(Giesen and Rollison, 1980;Stern et al.,1981).In these two studies the critical items had a special meaning to all participants,guilty and informed innocent alike, and the effect of deception was excluded because participants remained silent during the test.More recent studies on informed innocent partic-ipants(e.g.,Ben-Shakhar et al.,1999;Bradley and Rettinger,1992; Bradley and War?eld,1984)used a different questioning paradigm which ensured that the informed innocents were truthful when denying association with the crime-related items.In this paradigm, called the Guilty Actions Test(GAT),the wording of the questions was changed from passive knowledge(e.g.,“what was the color of the stolen envelope?”)to active participation(e.g.,“was the color of the envelope you stole…?”)(see Bradley and War?eld,1984).Under this condition the detection rates of guilty participants were higher than those of any informed innocent group.However,when deception and knowl-edge were controlled,and the effect of guilt was examined alone,a very high rate of false positives was reported for the informed innocent participants(Bradley et al.,1996).It seems that in experimental settings guilt alone is insuf?cient to differentiate between guilty and informed innocent participants(Elaad,2009;2011).

The results of the aforementioned studies cannot be accounted for by the cognitive approach,because signi?cant differences in detection were obtained between groups who shared the same information.It was therefore suggested that factors other than mere knowledge, such as the act of lying and the motivation of guilty examinees to avoid detection,also affect CIT detection ef?cacy(Ben-Shakhar and Elaad,2003).Speci?cally,it was argued that these factors increase the signi?cance of the critical stimuli and make them dif?cult to ignore(Elaad and Ben-Shakhar,1989).

A new theoretical formulation for the differential responding to critical and neutral items in the CIT is,therefore,required.Bradley (2009;Bradley and Lang,2007)suggested that in the OR attention is linked to emotion.Emotions are fundamentally organized around two motivational systems,defensive and appetitive,which evolve to mediate transactions in the environment that either threaten or promote survival,and stimulus signi?cance is de?ned in terms of pleasure and arousal.Orienting in emotional,novel,and task-relevant contexts re?ects the engagement of the two motivational systems:Judgment of pleasure indicates which motivational system is engaged(appetitive or defensive),and judgment of arousal indi-cates the intensity of its activation.When activation of either system is minimal,arousal is rated as“low”,and events are usually labeled “unemotional”or“neutral”,implying a weak action tendency and a weak physiological responsivity.As appetitive or defensive motiva-tion increases,the ratings of arousal and physiological responding increase,indicating anticipation for action.Hence,when crime-unrelated items are presented in the CIT,activation of the defensive mo-tivation is minimal and physiological responsivity is weak.But as soon as a crime-related item is identi?ed,defensive motivation is activated, accompanied by elevated physiological responsivity.Another explana-tion was proposed by Verschuere et al.(2007)who argued that guilty suspects attempt to inhibit the physiological arousal that the OR produces.Orienting and inhibition interact during the CIT to create the differential physiological responsivity to the signi?cant stimuli.

In experimental CITs both the guilty and the innocent participants know that they are playing a game,and that once it is over they are free to leave whatever the outcome.In such low-stake conditions, the two groups are very similar to each other in terms of defensive motivation and attempts to inhibit arousal,and guilt alone cannot dif-ferentiate between guilty and informed innocent participants (Bradley et al.,1996).

By contrast,in real-life situations guilty suspects are aware of the low odds of“beating”the polygraph test.They therefore consider it a threat,expecting to be punished following its completion.The result may be either feelings of despair and hopelessness,or increased motiva-tion to“beat”the test.Guilty suspects in despair are likely to refrain from taking the test.However,most of those who choose to take the test have some hope for success.Their coping attitude is likely to be ac-companied by increased defensive motivation to take action,increased attention,and intensi?ed physiological responses to the threatening stimuli.

As to the innocent suspects,in real-life polygraph tests they might fear false positive outcomes,and therefore refuse to take the test.Yet those who choose to take the test feel con?dent that they are able to prove their innocence because the polygraph examiner presumably share their interest of arriving at the correct decision(namely,that they are truthful).Furthermore,evidence from both actual cases and laboratory experiments shows that innocent people who are accused tend to have na?ve faith in the power of their own innocence to set them free,and seem to trust the criminal justice system and cooperate with it(Kassin,2005).Their beliefs that truth and justice will prevail, and that their innocence will be uncovered,often lead them to waive their rights to silence,attorney and lineup(Holland,Kassin,and Wells, 2005,cited in Kassin,2005;Kassin and Norwick,2004),and to behave in ways that are forthcoming and cooperative in their interviews with police interrogators(Hartwig et al.,2005,2006).This attitude seems to be linked to a generalized belief in a just world where people get what they deserve and deserve what they get(Lerner,1980),as well as to the“illusion of transparency”—the tendency to overestimate the extent to which one's true thoughts,emotions and other inner states can be observed by others(Gilovich et al.,1998).

Feeling that the prospects of proving their innocence in the CIT are good,innocent suspects tend to adopt a passive attitude toward the test,which is accompanied by low defensive motivation,lack of inhibi-tion attempts,less focused attention,and weak physiological responses to the critical items.

The guilty and the innocents'states of mind have never been simu-lated in low-stake experimental settings.In the present study we manipulated these states of mind by speci?c instructions delivered to the participants.One set of instructions motivated some guilty and informed innocent participants to cope with the polygraph,while the other set motivated the rest of the participants to cooperate with it. The coping instructions indicated that the polygraph is biased against the participants and opposes their interest to yield truthful outcomes. They were therefore encouraged to cope with it by being constantly alert,attentive,and prepared for action.On the other hand,the cooper-ative instructions indicated that the polygraph is biased in the partici-pants'favor.They were therefore advised to avoid interfering with the process,stay calm and relaxed,and follow the examiner's instructions. Note that this is the?rst experimental examination of the motivation to cooperate within the context of the CIT.

141

L.Zvi et al./International Journal of Psychophysiology84(2012)140–148

Guilt and instruction types were systematically manipulated.In order to ensure equal footing of the two groups of participants,their knowledge of the critical information was controlled by ensuring that both,the guilty and the informed innocent participants alike,possessed the same critical knowledge.Furthermore,since it may be argued that handling the items during the performance of a mock-crime is likely to produce deeper encoding of the critical information than written information conveyed to the innocent participants(Ambach et al., 2011;Gamer,2010),the latter physically handled these items in an innocent context.

All participants were motivated to be found innocent by a monetary reward.As shown above,the guilty participants were expected to display increased defensive motivation,intensive effort to inhibit their arousal,and therefore to be more responsive to the critical items than the informed innocent participants.Since the coping instructions encouraged the participants to actively apply strategies that promote an innocence outcome,under this condition an increased detection ef?-cacy was expected;and since cooperative instructions promoted a relaxed attitude,low defensive motivation,and less attempts to inhibit arousal,a decreased detection ef?cacy was expected.

2.Method

2.1.Participants

The participants were125behavioral sciences undergraduate stu-dents(86females and39males)who were recruited through ads posted on bulletin boards in the campus library.Their mean age was23.5years(SD=2.4).In exchange for their participation they were either paid or given a course credit.An additional pay was rewarded to those found truth tellers in the polygraph test.

2.2.Design

The participants were tested in a standard CIT mock-crime proce-dure.The two states of mind were manipulated by a2×2between-subjects design,with two groups of guilt(guilty participants who actu-ally committed the mock-crime,and informed innocent participants who handled the crime-related items in an innocent context),and two states of mind(coping and cooperative)as manipulated by the instructions delivered to the participants.An additional group of unin-formed innocent participants served as control.The participants were randomly assigned to the?ve groups;25in each.

2.3.Apparatus

Three physiological indices were used for measuring CIT accuracy: (1)amplitude of the skin conductance response(SCR)which was mea-sured by a constant voltage system(0.5V Atlas Researchers Ltd.Israel). Two Ag/AgCl grass electrodes(0.8cm diameter)were applied using Johnson and Johnson K-Y jelly.There was one non-responder with respect to SCR who was excluded from the experiment;(2)?nger pulse waveform length(FPWL)responses which were recorded using an Atlas Researches piezoelectric plethysmograph positioned around the right hand thumb;and(3)respiration line length(RLL)responses which were recorded by an Atlas Researches piezoelectric belt posi-tioned around the thoracic area.However,since in many cases the re-cordings of this measure were not properly registered due to technical problems,they were replaced by the recordings of a covert back respi-ration measure.In a recent study(Elaad and Ben-Shakhar,2008)it was observed that this covert measure elicits similar responses to those elicited by the standard respiration measure.The covert measure was recorded using respiratory piezoelectric effort transducers(Atlas Researches)hidden in the back support of the polygraph examination chair.However,a respiration belt was attached to all the participants during the entire experimental session.

The experiment was conducted in an air-conditioned laboratory, and was monitored from a control room separated from the laborato-ry by a one-way mirror.A serial communication link from the Data Acquisition System(DAS)was split in parallel into the serial ports of two separate PC computers.One computer controlled stimulus pre-sentation and computed the skin conductance,respiration and car-diovascular changes.The stimuli were displayed on a15in.color monitor positioned in front of the examinee.The second computer displayed the graphs in real time on a15in.color monitor placed in the control room in front of the experimenter.The graphs were recorded for subsequent visual analysis and artifact control.

3.Procedure

The procedure of the present experiment was approved by the insti-tutional review board.The experiment was conducted by two experi-menters who performed two different roles;each of them for about one-half of the participants.

The?rst experimenter met the participants individually and in-formed them about their role in the experiment,registered their gender and age,and obtained their informed consent to undergo a polygraph test.

The participants were assigned to one of the?ve groups(guilty-coping;guilty-cooperating;informed innocents-coping;informed innocents-cooperating;uninformed innocents-control)according to a predetermined random order,and randomly assigned to one of four different crime pro?les,according to their gender and month of birth.

Each crime pro?le speci?ed six features of a theft(a stolen enve-lope):The envelope's color and addressee;as well as a piece of jewelry, a sum of money,an object,and a photograph of an animal—all con-tained in the stolen envelope.The pro?les were:(1)a yellow envelope addressed to the research authority,containing57New Israeli Shekels (NIS),a necklace,a calculator,and a photograph of a bear;(2)a green envelope addressed to the computer department,containing24NIS,a ring,a pen,and a photograph of a rhinoceros;(3)a red envelope addressed to the security of?cer,containing49NIS,earrings,spectacles, and a photograph of a zebra;and(4)a blue envelope addressed to the academic secretary,containing63NIS,a bracelet,a key,and a photo-graph of a lion.

The participants were instructed to pick up one of twelve instruc-tion sheets that contained the various pro?les.The sheets had been placed in two six-sheet piles on a desk,one pile designated for the male participants and the other for the female participants.Two months(e.g.,January and February)were indicated on the top of each sheet.Each crime pro?le appeared on three(out of the twelve) sheets.

The assignment of pro?les to the examinees was random as demon-strated by applying a Chi-square test for independence on the pro?les' frequencies in the four experimental conditions(χ2(9)=7.29,ns).

A?fth pro?le of neutral control items(a gray envelope addressed to the students dean,containing31NIS,a watch,a camera,and a pho-tograph of a vulture)was used only in the interrogation phase of the experiment.Finally,a sixth buffer pro?le of neutral items(a black en-velope addressed to the?nance section,containing16NIS,a pendant, cell phone,and a photograph of an elephant)followed the presenta-tion of each question in order to absorb the initial OR.

3.1.Guilt and informed innocence manipulations

The participants simulating guilt received an explanation of the nature of the experiment from the?rst experimenter who told them that the purpose of the study was to?nd out whether they can avoid detection by the polygraph.

They then picked up the instruction sheet according to their gender and month of birth and,obeying the instructions,committed a mock-

142L.Zvi et al./International Journal of Psychophysiology84(2012)140–148

theft in an of?ce adjacent to the psychophysiological laboratory(where they were later tested).Four alternative crime patterns were used: (a)Removal of a book from a shelf in order to get a yellow envelope addressed to the research authority containing57New Israeli Shekels (NIS),a necklace,a calculator,and a photograph of a bear;(b)removal of a briefcase in order to get a green envelope addressed to the computer department containing24NIS,a ring,a pen,and a photograph of a rhinoc-eros;(c)removal of a coat in order to get a red envelope addressed to the security of?cer containing49NIS,earrings,spectacles,and a photo-graph of a zebra;and(d)pushing aside a telephone in order to get a blue envelope addressed to the academic secretary containing63NIS,a bracelet,a key,and a photograph of a lion(The critical items are marked in italics).The participants were instructed to take the content of the envelope and put it in their pocket or bag,and then return to the experimenter.

The informed innocent participants were told by the?rst experi-menter that the purpose of the study was to?nd out whether they could prove their innocence in a polygraph test.The participants were asked to take the instruction sheet according to their gender and month of birth,and leave the room.Once outside they were di-rected to a trash can where they looked for a speci?c package(out of?ve)that contained the envelope with a piece of jewelry,a sum of money,an object,and a photograph of an animal.The participants were then instructed to look inside the envelope,make sure that all the articles listed on the instruction sheet were in place,and that the envelope's color and addressee are correct.They were then instructed to take the envelope with all its content and deliver it to the experimenter.Thus,both the guilty and the innocent participants obtained the critical information by handling the critical items.

Upon returning,the experimenter told the guilty and the informed innocent participants that they were suspected as thieves because they were seen near the of?ce from which the envelope was stolen, and therefore,they had to undergo a polygraph test.The innocent participants were told that their role in the experiment was to prove their innocence in the test.The guilty participants'task was to convince that they had not been involved in the crime by refraining from disclos-ing crime-related information they might possessed.

3.2.Coping and cooperating manipulations

Half of the innocent and guilty participants received written instruc-tions(that were subsequently orally repeated by the experimenter) that encouraged them to cope with the polygraph.Speci?cally,guilty participants were told that the polygraph is designed to catch deceptive suspects and that being guilty the system is biased against them.They were advised to avoid detection by staying alert,ready to act,and atten-tive to the questions asked.Adoption of this attitude would force the polygraph to operate under less than optimal conditions,thus reducing its effectiveness and increasing their chances of beating it.The informed innocent participants were told that despite their innocence the poly-graph was biased against them as it operated under the assumption that they were guilty.They were therefore advised that coping with the test—by being alert,attentive to the questions asked,and ready to act—would be bene?cial to them and improve their chances of being exonerated.The coping participants were further told that they had25NIS to their credit which they might forfeit if the polygraph detected their concealment(guilty participants)or mistakenly indi-cated that they were withholding information(informed innocents).

The remaining guilty and innocent participants received written and oral instructions that encouraged them to cooperate with the poly-graph.The innocent participants were told that being innocent they were privileged because the polygraph is designed to help people prove their innocence.They were therefore advised to cooperate with the polygraph by adopting a relaxed and calm attitude and by following the examiner's instructions so as to allow the examiner perform under the best possible conditions.The guilty participants were told that despite their guilt the system is biased in their favor by assuming that they are innocent,and were therefore advised to cooperate with the polygraph by staying relaxed and calm.The cooperating participants were further told that they had25NIS to their credit which they could keep if the polygraph indicated that they were telling the truth (innocent participants)or failed to detect their concealed knowledge (guilty participants).

All the participants were instructed not to move during the entire examination so as to avoid the impression that they were trying to in-terfere with the test.

3.3.Uninformed innocence manipulation

The uninformed innocent participants were asked to indicate their gender and month of birth and then leave the room and wait outside for3min.Upon returning they were told that they were suspected of stealing money from an envelope in an adjacent of?ce because they were seen near the of?ce.The participants were told that they were innocent,but had to prove their innocence in a polygraph test.They were given25NIS to their credit which they could keep if the poly-graph indicated that they were telling the truth.

3.4.The polygraph test

After performing their role in the experiment the participants met again the experimenter who reminded them of their respective roles in the experiment(to cope or to cooperate with the polygraph).The experimenter added that the participants had25NIS(or course cred-it)for the very participation in the experiment,and an additional sum of25NIS as a bonus for truthful outcomes.

The participants were then directed to the examination room where they met the second experimenter who conducted the poly-graph test.This experimenter was aware of the participants'guilt condition and the instructions they were given,but was unaware of their randomly assigned critical pro?le.She told the participants that they would undergo a polygraph test regarding a theft of a miss-ing envelope.Their role was to cope(or cooperate)successfully with the polygraph test.If they succeeded in yielding truthful outcomes, they would be entitled to the additional bonus.

The second experimenter accompanied the participants to the ex-amination room,and asked them to sit down in the examination chair,lean on the back support,place their hands on the arms support, look at the monitor in front of them,and refrain from moving during the entire test.The experimenter then attached the polygraph devices to the examinees,while explaining the function of each device(e.g.,“the device that I am attaching to your?nger will record your blood?ow and heart rate”).

The experimenter moved to the adjacent control room and through a speaker explained that the polygraph would determine whether the participants were involved in the theft on the basis of their physiologi-cal responses.She reminded the participants that the polygraph works against(or in accord with)their best interest to yield truthful outcomes, and reminded them of their role to cope(or cooperate)with the test. She made it clear that the purpose of the study was to determine whether the participants were able to successfully cope(or cooperate) with the polygraph,and reminded them about the bonus for success.

The CIT questions were presented to the participants after an initial rest period of2min.during which skin conductance baseline was recorded.Six questions were presented,each focusing on a different feature of the mock-crime(the color of the stolen envelope;the name of the addressee;the stolen sum of money;the stolen jewelry;the sto-len object;and the stolen photograph).The questions were presented on the computer monitor and were read aloud to the participants from pre-recorded sound?les.Items were recorded by a male person who was unaware of the critical items.The visual presentation of each item lasted for5s and the acoustic presentation for about1s.The

143

L.Zvi et al./International Journal of Psychophysiology84(2012)140–148

acoustic presentation began about1s after the onset of the visual presentation.

Each question contained11items:one critical(e.g.,the color of the stolen envelope)and four neutral control items(other colors of envelopes)which were presented in a random order and then repeat-ed in a different order.A neutral buffer item(a different color)which was presented at the beginning of each question was designed to ab-sorb the initial orienting response.Interstimulus intervals ranged from16to24s,with a mean interval of20s.The questions were pre-sented in a random sequence with a break after the?rst three ques-tions,designed to give the participants the opportunity to take a deep breath and move their limbs.Subsequently,the remaining three questions were presented.Whenever necessary,the experi-menter commented on the behavior of the participants in the?rst part of the experiment(e.g.,do not yawn,do not cross your legs), and reminded them to sit straight and refrain from moving while being tested.All questions were formulated according to the GAT questioning format.For example,with relation to the stolen sum of money,the participants were asked:“was the amount of money that you stole(75NIS,63NIS,etc.)”.The GAT format guaranteed that guilty participants lied in response to the critical items,and told the truth in response to the controls.The innocent participants (both informed and uninformed)told the truth in response to both the critical and the neutral items.

In order to assess the success of the experimental manipulation, following the polygraph test the participants in the four experimental groups were asked to name the six critical items of their pro?le,and to indicate how much they wished that the polygraph detects their actual involvement with the theft on a scale ranging from0(I wanted very much that the polygraph would detect my actual involvement) through100(I wanted very much that the polygraph would not de-tect my actual involvement).The participants were further asked to indicate their levels of coping and cooperation with the polygraph test on scales ranging from0(not at all)through100(all the time). Finally,they were asked to indicate how they perceived their success in the test,with success de?ned as a polygraph's indication that they were not involved in the theft.Answers were given on a scale ranging from0(not at all)through100(absolutely),with a midpoint of50 which indicated that the participants felt they were partially success-ful.Once the test was completed,the participants were debriefed about the purpose of the study,paid,and asked not to discuss it with other fellow students for the subsequent three months.

3.5.Response scoring

Participant'responses were transmitted in real time to the com-puter.A sampling rate of20per second was always used.

3.5.1.Electrodermal responses

SCR was computed as the maximal increase in skin conductance, from1to5s after stimulus onset(Ben-Shakhar et al.,1999).

3.5.2.Finger pulse

FPWL responses were de?ned as the measured line length of the pattern that depicts the activity of the peripheral blood vessel within 15s from stimulus onset.The FPWL response is re?ected by a shorter line length—the shorter the line the stronger is the response(see Elaad and Ben-Shakhar,2006,for details).

3.5.3.Respiration

Respiration responses were de?ned on the basis of the total respira-tion line length(RLL)during the15-s interval following stimulus onset where shorter lines correspond to stronger responses(see Elaad et al., 1992for details).4.Results

4.1.Manipulation check:instructions

Following the completion of the CIT,the participants were asked to assess their level of coping and cooperation with the test by an-swering the following two questions:“Indicate your level of coopera-tion with the polygraph during the test”;“Indicate your level of coping with the polygraph during the test”.The answers to both questions were given on a scale ranging from0(not coping or not cooperating at all)through100(coping or cooperating during the en-tire test).We combined both scales by subtracting the coping scores from the cooperating scores.Thus,a positive score re?ected the ten-dency to cooperate,and a negative score re?ected the tendency to cope.A2(Guilt;guilt,innocence)×2(Instructions;cope,cooperate) analysis of variance(ANOVA)on the combined report yielded a sig-ni?cant,F(1,96)=57.90,p b.001,η2p=.38,main effect for Instruc-tions,showing that the cooperative instructions were associated with higher level of reported cooperation than the coping instruc-tions(Table1).A signi?cant,F(1,96)=26.58,p b.001,η2p=.22,Guilt effect was also obtained,showing that the informed innocent partic-ipants were more willing to cooperate with the polygraph test than the guilty participants who preferred to cope(Table1).Finally,a sig-ni?cant,F(1,96)=13.15,p b.001,η2p=.12,Guilt×Instructions inter-action showed that the combination of informed innocence and instructions to cooperate was associated with a higher level of coop-eration than any other combination,whereas the combination of guilt and instructions to cope was associated with the highest coping level. Finally,the score computed for the uninformed innocent participants (mean=92.0,SD=21.2)was associated with the highest level of co-operation.This score was signi?cantly higher than the corresponding score computed for the informed innocents who were instructed to cope,t(48)=3.87,p b.001,but not signi?cantly different from the score computed for the informed innocents who were instructed to cooperate,t(48)=1.66,ns.

4.2.Manipulation check:guilt

The participants were further asked about their wish to be detected by the polygraph.A2(Guilt)×2(Instructions)ANOVA was carried out on the data which yielded a signi?cant,F(1,96)=86.23, p b.001,η2p=.47,Guilt effect,showing that the guilty participants' wish to remain undetected(Mean=87.40,SD=24.31)was greater than that of the informed innocents(Mean=26.20,SD=39.84). Neither the Instruction effect,F(1,96)=0.18,nor the interaction effect, F(1,96)=2.12,was signi?cant.

4.3.Perceived success in the test

A major difference between the states of mind of guilty and innocent suspects concerns the perceived prospect of success(which was de-?ned as a polygraph indication that they were not involved in the theft).A2(Guilt)×2(Instructions)ANOVA was conducted on the Table1

Means(and SDs)of the reported levels of coping and cooperating with the polygraph test.

Instructions Across

instructions

Coping Cooperating

Mean(SD)Mean(SD)Mean(SD) Guilty?68.0(42.95)57.6(50.93)?5.6(79.05) Informed innocent30.0(77.30)74.8(47.36)52.4(67.36) Across guilt?19.4(79.50)66.2(49.44)23.4(78.67) Note.Positive scores indicate reported tendency to cooperate rather than to cope with the test.

144L.Zvi et al./International Journal of Psychophysiology84(2012)140–148

participants'predicted success scores.A signi?cant Guilt effect,F(1,96)= 10.15,p b.005,η2p=.10,showed that the informed innocent partici-pants predicted more success(Mean=67.40,SD=22.02)than the guilty ones(Mean=53.60,SD=21.36).Neither the Instruction effect, F(1,96)=1.55,nor the interaction effect,F(1,96)=0.77,were signi?cant

4.4.Recall of crime-related items

At the end of the experiment the participants were asked to recall the items that appeared on their instruction sheet.Recollection means and SDs are displayed in Table2.A2(Guilt)×2(Instructions) ANOVA conducted on the number of recalled items,yielded a signi?-cant,F(1,96)=8.62,p b.01,η2p=.08,Guilt×Instructions effect,show-ing that the combination of guilt and instructions to cope,and informed innocence and instructions to cooperate,produced poorer recall for the critical items than the combination of guilt with instruc-tions to cooperate,and informed innocence—with instructions to cope.The two factors(guilt and instructions)on which the present study focuses did not affect memory.Neither Guilt,F(1,96)=0.02, nor Instructions,F(1,96)=2.89,yielded a signi?cant effect.

4.5.Psychophysiological Z score analysis

In order to eliminate individual differences in responsivity and permit a meaningful summation of the participants'responses,all re-sponses to each CIT question were transformed into within-subject standard scores relative to the respective means and standard devia-tions.These standard scores were computed for each of the three physiological indices(SCR,FPWL and RLL).Standardization transfor-mation was similar to all three measures,but because concealed knowledge is indicated by smaller rather than by larger RLLs and FPWLs,all these Z scores were multiplied by?1.

For each participant,mean standardized responses to the critical alternatives were computed across CIT series.Mean scores across par-ticipants within each experimental condition served as the detection score of that condition.In order to avoid in?ation of detection ef?ciency, the physiological data were gathered and analyzed irrespective of the participants'memory to the crime-related items.The mean of each physiological score,as well as the mean of a combined measure of all physiological indices(SCR+FPWL+RLL)/3,are presented in Table3.

In order to assess whether the guilty participants responded to the critical items more than the informed innocents,and whether the in-structions affected these responses,Z scores of the physiological mea-sures were analyzed using a multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA)with Guilt(guilty https://www.doczj.com/doc/0619087861.html,rmed innocents),and Instruc-tions(coping vs.cooperating),as independent factors,and SCR, FPWL,and RLL as the dependent factors.A signi?cant,F(1,96)=5.81, p=.02,η2p=.06,SCR effect for Guilt was obtained,indicating that guilty participants'SCRs to the critical items were stronger than those of the informed innocents(Table3).The corresponding RLL and FPWL effects were not signi?cant(F(1,96)=2.22,and F(1,96)= 0.60,respectively).A signi?cant,F(1,96)=5.46,p=.02,η2p=.05, SCR effect for Instructions was also obtained,showing that partici-pants who were instructed to cope with the polygraph,displayed stronger SCRs to the critical items than the participants who were instructed to cooperate with it.Again,the effects for both RLL and FPWL were not signi?cant,(F(1,96)=1.43,and F(1,96)=0.84,respec-tively).No signi?cant interactive effects were obtained.

A2(Guilt)×2(Instructions)ANOVA conducted on the combined measure,yielded a signi?cant,F(1,96)=5.26,p=.02,η2p=.05,Guilt effect,and a signi?cant,F(1,96)=4.79,p=.03,η2p=.05,Instructions effect.No signi?cant interaction effect,F(1,96)=0.21,was obtained.

4.6.ROC analysis

Another way to analyze the results is by a method derived from Signal Detection Theory.This method has been frequently employed in CIT studies(e.g.,Ben-Shakhar,1977;Elaad,2010;Elaad and Ben-Shakhar,1989;1997;Verschuere et al.,2007;Vossel et al.,2003), and was recommended by the National Research Council(2003)as highly relevant for descriptions of the diagnostic value of polygraph tests.In Signal Detection Theory,detection ef?cacy is de?ned in terms of the degree of separation between the distributions of the re-sponses to the critical items produced by experimental and control participants.For this purpose,the distributions of the mean Z scores, computed for each informed participant across all the items of the relevant pro?le,and the distribution of the mean Z scores computed for each of the uninformed control participants,were calculated for each physiological measure.On the basis of these distributions,Re-ceiver Operating Characteristic(ROC)curves were generated,and the areas under these ROC curves,along with the corresponding 95%con?dence intervals,were computed(see Bamber,1975).The area statistic re?ects the detection ef?cacy for informed participants across all possible cutoff points.It assumes values between0and1, so that an area of1indicates that the two distributions are perfectly differentiated,whereas an area of0.5indicates that the two distribu-tions cannot be differentiated at all.ROC statistics computed for each physiological measure(SCR,FPWL,RLL,and the combined measure) of the four experimental conditions are presented in Table4which displays signi?cantly better than chance ROC areas for all three mea-sures taken under all experimental conditions(note that the lower bounds of the ROC areas are no less than0.5).This indicates that the informed participants responded to the critical information at a higher level than the control uninformed innocents.

The areas under the ROC curves computed for the coping-guilty and the cooperative-informed innocent participants were compared for each individual measure as well as for the combined measure. The distributions of the two groups were signi?cantly different for the SCR(Z=2.30).The other measures did not yield signi?cant

Table2

Means(and SDs)of remembered items.

Instructions Across

instructions

Coping Cooperating

Mean(SD)Mean(SD)Mean(SD) Guilty 5.20(0.81) 5.80(0.40) 5.50(0.71) Informed innocent 5.60(0.57) 5.44(0.71) 5.52(0.65) Across guilt 5.40(0.73) 5.62(0.60) 5.51(0.67) Note.The maximal number of items is six.Table3

Means(and SDs)of physiological responses.

Instructions Across

instructions

Coping Cooperating

Guilty participants

SCR.72(.43).53(.48).63(.47)

RLL b.48(.40).30(.37).39(.39) FPWL.41(.45).35(.37).38(.41) Combined.54(.29).39(.29).46(.30)

Informed innocents

SCR.52(.49).29(.39).41(.46)

RLL b.27(.33).28(.34).28(.33) FPWL.36(.26).29(.33).33(.30) Combined.39(.28).29(.24).34(.26)

Across guilt

SCR.62(.47).41(.45).52(.47)

RLL b.37(.38).29(.35).33(.36) FPWL.39(.36).32(.35).35(.35) Combined.46(.29).34(.27).40(.29) Note.RLL b stands for the respiration responses derived from the covert back measure.

145

L.Zvi et al./International Journal of Psychophysiology84(2012)140–148

differences.Clearly,the SCR differentiates between the coping-guilty participants and the cooperative-informed innocents.

5.Discussion

The present study examined the differential effects of guilty and informed innocents'states of mind on their physiological responsivity to critical CIT items and on the tests'detection ef?cacy.According to early theoretical formulations,the CIT is based on the assumption that the mere knowledge of the examinee is suf?cient for the elicita-tion of strong responses to the crime-related stimuli(Lykken,1974). However,experimental evidence shows that other factors,such as motivation and overt deception,also enhance responses and improve detection ef?cacy(see Ben-Shakhar and Elaad,2003).In order to further account for the non-cognitive components of the CIT,we pro-posed the existence of distinctive states of mind of guilty and inno-cent examinees.Speci?cally,guilty and innocent examinees differ in their willingness to cope and cooperate with the test.Therefore,we compared the motivation to beat the test(cope with it)with the mo-tivation to help the test reach the correct decision(cooperate with it). So far,only the effect of coping on CIT ef?cacy has been examined. The present study is the?rst to examine the effect of cooperation on this ef?cacy.

Guilty and informed innocent participants were systematically manipulated in a mock-crime experiment,and were instructed to either cope or cooperate with the polygraph.As the data show,both guilt and coping behavior were responsible for the enhanced SCR responses to the critical items:The guilty participants were more responsive to the critical items than the informed innocents,and when the participants were instructed to cope with the polygraph, SCR responses increased as well.As Table3shows,the responses measured by FPWL and RLL were in the same direction as the SCRs, but have not reached statistical signi?cance.Further research is need-ed to?nd out why FPWL and RLL are less sensitive to Guilt and In-structions effects than SCR.It is also interesting to learn how other physiological measures,such as phasic heart rate,thoracic and ab-dominal respiration and ERP responses,are in?uenced by coping and cooperating instructions.We leave this for future research.

Interestingly,guilt and coping had very similar effects on the physiological responses.When the informed innocent and the guilty participants received instructions that were inconsistent with their states of mind(coping instructions for the informed innocent participants,and cooperative instructions for the guilty ones),their mean responses to the critical items were similar for all measures. Speci?cally,the computed scores for guilty and informed innocent participants were:.53and.52for SCR,.30and.27for RLL,.35and .36for FPWL,.39and.39for the combined measure(see Table3).Ad-ditional research on the effects of coping and cooperating instructions is needed in order to corroborate these results.

The results may be explained by the higher defensive motivation employed during testing by the guilty and the coping participants than by the informed innocent and the cooperating participants.De-fensive motivation is manifested by increased alertness and focused attention to the critical items,which made them dif?cult to ignore. It may be further speculated that the guilty and coping examinees who recognize a threatening crime-related item,attempt to inhibit the arousal that accompany the elicitation of the OR.These attempts proved to be counterproductive and increase rather than decrease their physiological responsivity(Verschuere et al.,2007).

The present data support some prevailing intuitive beliefs among polygraph practitioners about how to construct the CIT.For example, it is believed that stimulation tests(such as card or number tests)that precede the CIT,might have differential effects on the states of mind of guilty and innocent suspects(Hira and Furumitsu,2002;p.20). In the card test the examinee is asked to pick up a card out of several cards held face down in front of him or her,look at it and return it to the pack of cards.The examinee is then asked,regarding each card, whether it was the selected one,and,as instructed,all responses are “no”.This answer is truthful for all cards but the selected one for which it is a lie.The examiner then demonstrates the test's ef?cacy by detecting the lie(the selected card).A similar procedure is used with the number test where a number,rather than a card,is selected and then detected(Elaad and Kleiner,1986).The card and number test demonstrations threaten guilty suspects'expectations to avoid detection and punishment,and enhance their motivation to beat the test and make efforts to cope with the ef?cient polygraph.In real-life situations some guilty suspects might be driven to despair and refuse to take the test.

Unlike the guilty suspects,uninformed innocent suspects are like-ly to respond to such accuracy demonstrations by enhancing their motivation to cooperate with the polygraph.Being convinced that they are going to be exonerated,they feel content,and gladly take the test.The effect on informed innocents is unknown but it is possi-ble that they might fear that their concealed knowledge might be detected and be motivated to cope with the test.A different stimula-tion that would motivate informed innocent examinees to cooperate is needed.The present results provide such stimulation.

Further support for the association between guilt and coping on the one hand,and between informed innocence and cooperation on the other hand,is provided by the participants'answers to several post-test questions.In one of them,the participants were asked about their level of coping and cooperation in the test.As the data show,regardless of the type of instructions delivered,the guilty par-ticipants tended to indicate that they had coped with the test,where-as the informed innocents tended to indicate that they had cooperated with it.Furthermore,it was observed that the readiness of the guilty participants to conceal information was signi?cantly more conspicuous than that of the informed innocents.Finally,it was found that the informed innocent participants felt more con?-dent about their chances to yield favorable results than their guilty counterparts.As expected,these?ndings re?ect signi?cant differ-ences between informed innocent and guilty examinees'states of mind in the CIT.The latter realize that their chances to beat the test are slim,and therefore adopt a coping attitude in order to undermine its ef?cacy,whereas the former believe that the test works in their best interest,and therefore cooperate with it.

Overall,instructions and state of guilt were not associated with re-call of crime-related items.However,when guilt was combined with

Table4

Areas under the ROC curves(and95%con?dence intervals).

Instructions Across instructions

Coping Cooperating

Area95%CI Area95%CI Area95%CI

Guilty participants

SCR.898.811–.984.813.688–.937.855.773–.938

RLL b.806.672–.941.701.552–.850.754.645–.862

FPWL.890.802–.977.866.760–.971.878.801–.955

Combined.960.891–1.00.886.783–.990.923.863–.983

Informed innocents

SCR.817.700–.933.696.547–.845.756.650–.863

RLL b.686.531–.842.685.531–.839.686.565–.806

FPWL.923.854–.992.881.779–.982.902.833–.971

Combined.907.825–.990.885.780–.990.896.967–.825

Across guilt

SCR.857.776–.938.754.648–.861.806.728–.883

RLL b.746.634–.858.693.575–.811.720.626–.813

FPWL.906.841–.972.873.793–.953.890.828–.952

Combined.934.882–.985.886.809–.962.910.859–.960

Note.RLL b stands for the respiration responses derived from the unobtrusive back

measure.

146L.Zvi et al./International Journal of Psychophysiology84(2012)140–148

instructions to cooperate,and informed innocence was combined with instructions to cope,better recall was obtained than when the instructions matched the participants'states of mind.It is noteworthy that there was no parallel interactive effect in the participants' physiological responses to the crime-related items.The cooperative instructions given to the guilty participants,and the coping instructions given to the informed innocent participants,are clearly inconsistent with their inherent motivations to do exactly the opposite.Presumably,these odd,unexpected instructions made the participants more attentive to the critical items while trying to comprehend what was expected of them,which in turn enhanced their memory.

Further inspection of the data reveals that the FPWL was very effective when the ROC analysis was applied(Table4),but not as effective when means of the physiological responses were used (Table3).This seems to be a methodological artifact due to the perfor-mance of the uninformed innocent participants.Very low(mean?.14) FPWL responses were elicited by the control group to the critical items. In comparison,their SCR and RLL responses to the same critical items were on the average.02and.10.The ROC analysis compares the responses of guilty participants with those of the controls,and the gap between the two determines the displayed ef?ciency.

Insight into the two distinct motivational processes of guilty and innocent suspects might offer new directions for implementing the CIT in the?eld practice.For example,the present study showed that coping-guilty and cooperative-informed innocent participants can be easily differentiated by mere instructions.Presumably,similar in-structions might be useful in?eld tests.Speci?cally,as the examiner does not know whether the examinee is guilty or innocent,he/she may present the cooperative instructions to all examinees as follows:“If you are innocent you are privileged because the polygraph system is designed to help innocent people prove their innocence.Therefore, if you are innocent,you are advised to cooperate with the polygraph by adopting a relaxed and calm attitude and by following the instruc-tions so as to allow the polygraph perform under the best possible conditions.”Now,the examinee makes a choice.Innocent examinees are likely to adopt the suggested cooperative attitude and try to help the system exonerate them.Guilty examinees are threatened by these instructions and are likely to adopt the opposite aversive attitude,and cope with the polygraph.

In real-life CITs informed innocent suspects are often unable to identify the source of their crime-related knowledge.Alternatively, they may have doubts about the reliability of the source of their knowledge,and consequently might be reluctant to disclose the in-formation they possess lest it be used against them.Furthermore, due to the belief in a just world,informed innocent suspects might feel that they will be exonerated in the CIT even when they do not re-veal all they know.The results of the present experiment suggest that a coping attitude toward the test might enhance knowledgeable in-nocents'physiological responses and undermine their chances of passing it successfully.Nevertheless,the results are encouraging as it seems that simple instructions to cooperate may prevent many false positive outcomes.

The present study entails a laboratory experiment where the stakes are low and the participants know that no harm would be in?icted upon them as a result of their performance on the test.Hence,they are not ex-posed to the real threats that criminal suspects usually face during real CITs.Nevertheless,the detection of coping-guilty participants was much better than the detection of cooperative-informed innocents.It is therefore reasonable to expect that in real-life guilty suspects under-going CIT will be more fearful of being detected and more motivated to beat the test than their counterparts in the experimental setting.This state of mind might result in enhanced physiological responses to the critical items,thus enhancing the distinction between them and the informed innocent suspects.The difference between the two groups might be further increased because in real-life CITs cooperative-innocent suspects might trust the test even more than their counter-parts in the experimental setting.

Insight into the two distinct motivational processes of guilty and informed innocent suspects also offers new theoretical perspectives for studying CIT effects that previous research has failed to consider. For example,an underlying assumption in the present study was that the tendency to cope with the polygraph is associated with the understanding on the part of guilty examinees that their chances to produce truthful outcomes in the test are poor.Conversely,the ten-dency shown by informed innocent examinees to cooperate with the test is associated with their trust in the system that would exon-erate them.One may wonder whether a high prospect for success en-courages cooperation,whereas a poor prospect encourages coping. Other questions,such as how the chances to successfully in?uence the test outcome,the level of alertness,attentiveness,and prepared-ness for action,affect the motivation to cope or to cooperate with the test,should be considered in future research.

Furthermore,in the present study guilty and informed innocent participants were instructed to either cope or cooperate with the test.Future research should examine whether the two groups dem-onstrate differential levels of willingness to cope and to cooperate with the polygraph test when they are free to decide which strategy to adopt.

Finally,the results of the present study enable a reexamination of the argument,put forward by Gamer(2010),that CIT ef?cacy in detecting guilty and informed innocent participants can be main-tained only when the critical information is not deeply encoded.In the present study,both the guilty and the informed innocent partici-pants were required to handle the critical items,thus deeply encoding the critical information.However,regardless of instructions,the in-formed innocents responded less to the critical items than the in-formed guilty participants.

To sum up,the present study extends previous demonstrations that factors other than recognition operate to increase CIT's detection ef?cacy(see Ben-Shakhar and Elaad,2003for a review).Speci?cally, it shows that when the distinctive states of mind are manipulated, guilty and informed innocent participants can be successfully distin-guished from each other.These newly identi?ed factors offer new perspectives for both the theoretical study of the CIT and its imple-mentation in the?eld.

The concern about possible leakage of relevant information to in-nocent suspects is one of the reasons for the infrequent employment of the CIT as an aid in criminal investigations.That is because a high rate of false positive outcomes is unacceptable in?eld practice(e.g., Honts and Perry,1992).Manipulating these newly identi?ed factors might mitigate this concern by increasing detection ef?cacy and de-creasing the danger of false positive errors.

References

Ambach,W.,Dummel,S.,Luer,T.,Vaitl,D.,2011.Physiological responses in a Concealed Information Test are determined interactively by encoding procedure and ques-tioning format.Int.J.Psychophysiol.81,275–282.

Bamber,D.,1975.The area above the ordinal dominance graph and the area below the receiver operating characteristic graph.J.Math.Psychol.12,387–415.

Ben-Shakhar,G.,1977.A further study of the dichotomization theory in detection of in-formation.Psychophysiology14,408–413.

Ben-Shakhar,G.,Elaad,E.,2003.The validity of psychophysiological detection of infor-mation with the Guilty Knowledge Test:a meta-analytic review.J.Appl.Psychol.

88,131–151.

Ben-Shakhar,G.,Gronau,N.,Elaad,E.,1999.Leakage of relevant information to innocent examinees in the GKT:an attempt to reduce false-positive outcomes by introducing target stimuli.J.Appl.Psychol.84,651–660.

Bradley,M.M.,2009.Natural selective attention:orienting and emotion.Psychophysi-ology46,1–11.

Bradley,M.M.,Lang,P.J.,2007.Emotion and motivation,In:Cacioppo,J.T.,Tassinary, L.G.,Berntson,G.(Eds.),Handbook of Psychophysiology,2nd Ed.Cambridge Uni-versity Press,NY,pp.581–607.

Bradley,M.T.,MacLaren,V.V.,Carle,S.B.,1996.Deception and nondeception in guilty knowledge and guilty actions polygraph tests.J.Appl.Psychol.81,153–160.

147

L.Zvi et al./International Journal of Psychophysiology84(2012)140–148

Bradley,M.T.,Rettinger,J.,1992.Awareness of crime-relevant information and the guilty knowledge test.J.Appl.Psychol.77,55–59.

Bradley,M.T.,War?eld,J.F.,1984.Innocence,information,and the guilty knowledge test in the detection of deception.Psychophysiology21,683–689.

Elaad,E.,2009.Effects of context and state of guilt on the detection of concealed crime information.Int.J.Psychophysiol.71,225–234.

Elaad,E.,2010.Effects of perceived reliability and generalization of crime-related infor-mation on detection in the Concealed Information Test.Int.J.Psychophysiol.75, 295–303.

Elaad,E.,2011.Effects of incomplete information on the detection of concealed crime details.Appl.Psychophysiol.Biofeedback.doi:10.1007/s10484-011-9153-2. Elaad,E.,Ben-Shakhar,G.,1989.Effects of motivation and verbal response type on psy-chophysiological detection of information.Psychophysiology26,442–451. Elaad,E.,Ben-Shakhar,G.,1997.Effects of item repetitions and variations on the ef?-ciency of the guilty knowledge test.Psychophysiology34,587–596.

Elaad,E.,Ben-Shakhar,G.,2006.Finger pulse waveform length in the detection of con-cealed information.Int.J.Psychophysiol.61,226–234.

Elaad,E.,Ben-Shakhar,G.,2008.Covert respiration measures for the detection of con-cealed information.Biol.Psychol.77,284–291.

Elaad,E.,Kleiner,M.,1986.The stimulation test in polygraph?eld examinations:a casestudy.J.Police Sci.Adm.14,328–333.

Elaad,E.,Ginton,A.,Jungman,N.,1992.Detection measures in real-life criminal guilty knowledge tests.J.App.Psych.77,757–767.

Gamer,M.,2010.Does the Guilty Actions Test allow for differentiating guilty partici-pants from informed innocents?A re-examination.Int.J.Psychophysiol.76,19–24. Gati,I.,Ben-Shakhar,G.,1990.Novelty and signi?cance in orientation and habituation:

a feature-matching approach.J.Exp.Psychol.Gen.119,251–263.

Giesen,M.,Rollison,M.A.,1980.Guilty knowledge versus innocent associations:effects of trait anxiety and stimulus context on skin conductance.J.Res.Pers.14,1–11. Gilovich,T.,Savitsky,K.,Medvec,V.,1998.The illusion of transparency:biased assess-ments of others'ability to read one's emotional states.J.Pers.Soc.Psychol.75, 332–346.

Hartwig,M.,Granhag,P.A.,Stromwall,L.A.,Kronkvist,O.,2006.Strategic use of evi-dence during police interviews:when training to detect deception https://www.doczj.com/doc/0619087861.html,w Hum.Behav.30,603–619.

Hartwig,M.,Granhag,P.A.,Stromwall,L.A.,Vrij,A.,2005.Detecting deception via stra-tegic disclosure of https://www.doczj.com/doc/0619087861.html,w Hum.Behav.29,469–484.Hira,S.,Furumitsu,I.,2002.Polygraphic examinations in Japan:application of the guilty knowledge test in forensic investigations.Int.J.Police.Sci.Manag.4,16–27. Holland,L.,Kassin,S.M.,Wells,G.L.,2005.Why suspects waive the right to a lineup:a study in the risk of actual innocence.Poster presented at the meeting of the Amer-ican Psychology-Law Society,San Diego,CA.

Honts,C.R.,Perry,M.V.,1992.Polygraph admissibility:changes and https://www.doczj.com/doc/0619087861.html,w Hum.Behav.16,357–379.

Kassin,S.M.,2005.On the psychology of confessions:does innocence put innocents at risk?Amer.Psychol.60,215–228.

Kassin,S.M.,Norwick,R.J.,2004.Why people waive their Miranda rights:the power of https://www.doczj.com/doc/0619087861.html,w Hum.Behav.28,211–221.

Lerner,M.J.,1980.The Belief in a Just World.Plenum,NY.

Lykken,D.T.,1959.The GSR in the detection of guilt.J.Appl.Psychol.43,385–388. Lykken,D.T.,1974.Psychology and the lie detection industry.Amer.Psychol.29, 725–739.

Lykken,D.T.,1998.A Tremor in the Blood:Uses and Abuses of the Lie Detector,2nd edn.Plenum Press,NY.

National Research Council,2003.The Polygraph and Lie Detection,Committee to Re-view the Scienti?c Evidence on the Polygraph,Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education.The National Academic Press,Washington,DC. Sokolov,E.N.,1963.Perception and the Conditioned Re?ex.Pergamon Press,NY. Stern,R.M.,Breen,J.P.,Watanabe,T.,Perry,B.S.,1981.Effects of feedback of physiolog-ical information on responses to innocent associations and guilty knowledge.

J.Appl.Psychol.66,677–681.

Verschuere,B.,Crombez,G.,Koster,E.H.W.,De Clercq,A.,2007.Antisociality,underar-ousal and the validity of the concealed information polygraph test.Biol.Psychol.

74,309–318.

Verschuere,B.,Ben-Shakhar,G.,2011.Theory of the Concealed Information Test.In: Verschuere,B.,Ben-Shakhar,G.,Meijer,E.(Eds.),Memory Detection:Theory and Application of the Concealed Information Test.Cambridge University Press,Cam-bridge UK,pp.128–148.

Vossel,G.,Gamer,M.,Godert,H.W.,Rill,H.G.,2003.The ef?ciency of detecting con-cealed information with the Guilty Knowledge Test:a comparison of different physiological variables and non-physiological methods of credibility assessment using signal detection theory.J.Psychophysiol.17,184(Abstract)..

148L.Zvi et al./International Journal of Psychophysiology84(2012)140–148

企业环保标语大全

企业环保标语大全 企业环保标语大全 1．保护中发展，发展中保护 2．落实环保责任，完善环保制度 3．环境与人类共存，开发与保护同步 4．垃圾混置是垃圾，垃圾分类是资源 5．建设绿色企业，坚持绿色经营 6．降低生产成本，节约地球资源 7．生产绿色产品，节约地球资源 8．珍惜资源、永续利用 9．依靠科技进步、促进环境保护 10．合理利用资源、保护生态平衡、促进经济持续发展11．保护环境山河美、持续发展事业兴 12．发展经济不能以牺牲环境为代价 13．使用环保材料，减少环境污染 14．推行清洁生产，促进经济社会可持续发展15．推行清洁生产，实现碧水蓝天 16．推行循环经济，提高资源利用水平 17．依靠科技进步，推行清洁生产 18．环境与人类共存，发展与环保同步

19．贯彻环境教育，宣导环保资讯 20．全员参与改善，持续环保社区 21．提高环保意识，争做环保公民 22．让地球远离污染，让绿色走进家园23．有限的资源，无限的循环 24．降低损耗齐用心，开源节流增效益25．节约的是利润，损耗的是财富 26．树立节约意识，倡导节约行为 27．浪费不因量小而为之，节约不因细微而不为28．保护环境降污染，千方百计增效益29．资源节约齐参加，珍惜使用靠大家30．改变观念，废物利用，资源回收，持续发展31．保护环境、就是保护生产力 32．既要金山银山、更要青山绿水 33．提倡绿色生活、实施清洁生产 34．树立节水意识、反对浪费水源 35．提高环境道德水平、建设文明小康城区36．保护环境、造福后代 37．全面建设小康社会、同心共创美好家园38．当环保卫士、做时代公民 39．让大气清新、让天空蔚蓝、让河山碧绿40．企业求发展、环保须先行

(完整版)高中数学新课标学习心得体会

高中数学新课标学习心得体会 通过对新课标的学习，本人有一些心得体会，现汇报如下： 一、课程的基本理念 总体目标中提出的数学知识（包括数学事实、数学活动经验）本人认为可以简单的这样表述：数学知识是“数与形以及演绎”的知识。 1、基本的数学思想 基本数学思想可以概括为三个方面：即“符号与变换的思想”、“集全与对应的思想”和“公理化与结构的思想”，这三者构成了数学思想的最高层次。基于这些基本思想，在具体的教学中要注意渗透，从低年级开始渗透，但不必要进行理论概括。而所谓数学方法则与数学思想互为表里、密切相关，两者都以一定的知识为基础，反过来又促进知识的深化及形成能力。 2、重视数学思维方法 高中数学应注重提高学生的数学思维能力。数学思维的特性：概括性、问题性、相似性。数学思维的结构和形式：结构是一个多因素的动态关联系统，可分成四个方面：数学思维的内容（材料与结果）、基本形式、操作手段（即思维方法）以及个性品质（包括智力与非智力因互素的临控等）；其基本形式可分为逻辑思维、形象思维和直觉思维三种类型。 3、应用数学的意识 增强应用数学的意识主要是指在教与学观念转变的前提下，突出主动学习、主动探究。 4、注重信息技术与数学课程的整合 高中数学课程应提倡实现信息技术与课程内容的有机整合，整合的基本原则是有利于学生认识数学的本质。在保证笔算训练的全体细致，尽可能的使用科学型计算器、各种数学教育技术平台，加强数学教学与信息技术的结合，鼓励学生运用计算机、计算器等进行探索和发现。 5、建立合理的科学的评价体系 高中数学课程应建立合理的科学的评价体系，包括评价理念、评价内容、评价形式评价体制等方面。既要关注学生的数学学习的结果，也要关注他们学习的过程；既要关注学生数学学习的水平，也要关注他们在数学活动中表现出来的情感态度的变化，在数学教育中，评价应建立多元化的目标，关注学生个性与潜能的发展。 二、课程设置

初中生物第三单元(生物圈中的绿色植物)知识点

第三单元生物圈中的绿色植物 第一章生物圈中有哪些绿色植物 ?1、绿色植物分为四大类群：藻类、苔藓、蕨类、种子植物 一、藻类、苔藓、蕨类植物 ?2、藻类、苔藓、蕨类植物的区别： ?3、藻类，苔藓，蕨类植物的共同点：藻类，苔藓，蕨类植物都不结种子，它们的叶片背面 有孢子囊群，可产生孢子，称为孢子植物，孢子是一种生殖细胞，在温暖潮湿的地方才能萌发和生长，所以说孢子植物的生活离不开水。 4.藻类植物：“春水绿于染” 5.藻类植物既有单细胞，也有多细胞。既有生活在淡水中，也有海水中。 6.多细胞藻类植物整个身体浸没在水中，几乎全身都可以吸收水和无机盐。可以进行光合作用，但没有专门吸收和运输养料以及进行光合作用的器官。 7.藻类植物没有根茎叶的分化。 8.苔藓植物生存在阴湿环境中。有类似根和茎的分化，但是茎中没有导管，叶中没有叶脉，根很简单，称为假根，具有固定作用。 9.苔藓植物可作为监测空气污染程度的指示植物。 10.蕨类植物：有根茎叶的分化，具有输导组织。有些蕨类植物比较高大。 11.蕨类植物用处：①卷柏、贯众可药用②满江红是一种优良绿肥和饲料③蕨类植物遗体层层堆积，经过漫长年代、复杂变化，逐渐变成了煤。 12.藻类植物，苔藓植物，蕨类植物，生殖依靠孢子，所以也被统称为孢子植物。 第二节 二、种子植物 ? 1.、种子的结构 菜豆种子：种皮、胚(胚芽、胚轴、胚根、2片子叶)【双子叶植物，网状叶脉】

玉米种子：果皮和种皮、胚(胚芽、胚轴、胚根、1片子叶)、胚乳【单子叶植物，平行叶脉】种皮：保护里面幼嫩的胚。 胚：新植物体的幼体，由胚芽（发育成茎和叶）、胚轴（发育成连接根和茎的部位）、胚根（发育成根）和子叶组成。胚乳不是胚的结构。 ?2、子叶和胚乳里有营养物质，供给胚发育成幼苗。 ?3、菜豆种子中与子叶相连的结构是胚轴，玉米种子中滴加碘液变蓝的结构是胚乳，说明胚 乳中含有淀粉。 菜豆种子（双子叶植物）： 胚轴：发育成根和茎的连接部 胚芽：发育成茎叶芽 胚根：发育成根 子叶（两片）：贮存营养物质 种皮：保护 玉米种子（单子叶植物）： 果皮和种皮：保护胚 胚乳：贮存营养物质（含有淀粉，遇碘变蓝） 子叶（一片）：转运营养物质 胚芽：发育成茎叶芽 胚轴：发育成茎和根的连接部 胚根：发育成根 ?4、菜豆种子和玉米种子的异同 （严格意义来说，一粒玉米就是一个果实） ?5、种子植物比苔藓、蕨类更适应陆地的生活，其中一个重要的原因是能产生种子。 ?6、种子植物包括两大类群：裸子植物和被子植物。 裸子植物：种子裸露着，不能形成果实，常见的裸子植物有松、杉、柏、苏铁、银杏； 被子植物（绿色开花植物）：种子外面有果皮包被着，是陆地上分布最广泛的植物类群。（苹果，梨，葡萄，水稻） 第二章被子植物的一生

环保企业文化标语

环保企业文化标语 导读：本文是关于环保企业文化标语，如果觉得很不错，欢迎点评和分享！ 1、维护社会公德，保护生态环境。 2、环保时代，健康生活。自由追逐，财富就在咱们手中。 3、引领环保新时尚，创造自由新生活。 4、你环保健康，一起财富自由。 5、改善环境，保护家园；净化环境，美化家园。 6、百业要兴，环保先行。 7、给你“更环保、更健康、更成功”的选择。 8、低碳生活，自由财富。 9、环保新主义，财富由你创，健康自然来！ 10、拯救地球，一起动手。 11、人类若不能与其他物种共存，便不能与这个星球共存。 12、做世界一流环保产品，让地球人都身体康健，给财富自由的翅膀。 13、节能环保缔造健康生活，健康生活成就财富自由。 14、环保进万家，财富赢天下。 15、改善环境，创建美好未来是我们共同的愿望。 16、尽环保力量，谋健康财富。 17、蓝天白云，绿水青山；咱们的发奋，自然的美丽。

18、绿色环保，引领时尚。 19、咱们所拥有的不仅仅是财富，还有干净的水滋养身体。 20、一草一木要爱惜，环境生活创佳绩。 21、落实环境职责，完善环保制度。 22、既要金山银山，更要青山绿水。 23、树立企业形象，协调人与自然。 24、我们期待世界更蓝的天空，期待你灿烂的微笑，期待社会自由的财富。 25、悠然一心，财富自由。 26、争做环保使者，共创绿色礼貌。 27、改善生态环境，营造绿色家园。 28、节能为环保，财富又自由。 29、环保创造健康，财富携手自由。 30、我们所拥有的不仅是财富，还有干净的水滋养身体。 31、财富我创造，自由交给你，享受健康，享受绿色，享受美好生活。 32、绿色与生命共存，健康与财富共进。 33、环保又健康，财富享自由。 34、你我环保，一齐健康，共创财富，共享自由。 35、树环保意识，创健康财富。 36、创意节能环保，缔造健康生活，共创幸福财富，分享快乐自由。

乡村小学语文小班化教学策略研究

龙源期刊网 https://www.doczj.com/doc/0619087861.html, 乡村小学语文小班化教学策略研究 作者：仇家凤 来源：《文理导航》2020年第06期 【摘要】随着城镇化进程加快，大量农民向城镇转移，农村学生数减少，小班化教学成为现实。本文针对这一背景，就语文小班化教学的策略进行探讨，希望促进小学语文教学效果的提升。 【关键词】乡村小学;小班化教学;教学策略 近年来国内经济的快速发展吸引越来越多的农村劳动力进入城市谋取工作和发展机会。与此同时，农村学校的生源在逐渐减少，造成这种情况的原因一方面是由于国内长期以来施行的计划生育政策，另一方面务工人员将自己的子女带入城市，以此可以让他们享受到城市里良好的教育条件和环境。上述情况从客观上导致农村学校的适龄学生流失率越来越高，原来的大班在容量上逐渐缩减为小班，甚至是几名学生。农村教师在适应了之前的大班授课后，不得不面对目前农村学校这种急剧变化的教育情况，尤其是作为小学教育主课程的语文科目，其教学人员更需要考虑如何及时应对这些变化。 一、树立小班化教学理念 小班化给教育教学带来了新的契机。语文教学中的小班教学在表面上是指在学生数量较少的班级中进行的语文教学活动，而从更深层次的内容上来说，这种语文教学小班化其实是一种教育方式和方法的发展趋势，更是一种教学理念的演进。为了真正实现学生在语文课堂中能够以主体地位来参与到语文教学活动的各个环节，语文教师要在这里充当好教学引导者的角色。要重视学生在教学中的个性化发展，多阅读一些有利于提升语文阅读能力的文章，同时还要去积极探索有益的教学方法和策略，多赋予孩子学习的主动性，以此激发学生在小班化语文教学活动中的想象力和创造力，实现教育对人的引领和改造作用。 二、增强学生学习自信，发掘学生潜能 课堂教学是师生互动最重要的舞台，“在教学互动中提升质量”是关键，“充分挖掘每一个孩子的潜能”是目标。要努力实现这一目标，必须做到充分尊重每个学生的能力差异。抓住学生的闪光点，在同学、家长面前表扬。讲究语言艺术，让学生感受被赏识的快乐，用真诚的微笑和期待的目光面对每一个孩子，帮助学生树立信心。 三、尊重差异，实施“分层教学”

初中生物生物圈中的绿色植物知识点习题及答案

第三专题 生物圈中的绿色植物 一、绿色植物与生物圈的水循环 [知识网络结构] 水就是植物体的重要组成成分 原因 水保持植物直立的姿态,有利于进行光合作用 1、绿色植物的生活需要水 无机盐只有溶解在水中,才能被吸收与运输 水影响植物的分布:降水量大的地方,植被茂密 根吸水的部位:主要就是根尖成熟区, 吸水 成熟区的特点:生有大量根毛,增大根吸水的表面积 2、水分进入植物体内的途径 途径:木质部的导管 水分的运输 方向:自下而上 树皮:韧皮部中有筛管,输导有机物 茎的结构 形成层:细胞能分裂(木本植物有此结构) 木质部:有导管,输导水分与无机盐 实验:观察叶片的结构(练习徒手切片) 表皮(上、下表皮) 叶片的结构 叶肉 叶脉 重要结构:气孔,就是植物蒸腾失水的门户,也就是气体交换的窗口,由成对的保卫细 胞围成,气孔的开闭由保卫细胞控制。当保卫细胞吸水膨胀时,气孔张开, 当保卫细胞失水收缩时,气孔关闭。 概念:水分以气态从植物体内散发到体外的过程。 蒸腾作用 主要部位:叶片 降低了叶表面的温度 意义 促进对水与无机盐的运输 促进对水的吸收 绿色植物促进了生物圈中的水循环 绿色植物参与生物圈的水循环 提高大气湿度,增加降水量 保持水土 [课标考点解读] 绿色植物促进了生物圈中的水循环,因此保护森林与植被有非常重要的意义。本章重点阐明水就是绿色 植物生存的必要条件,水对植被的影响,植物吸水的主要部位及特点,水运输的途径,蒸腾作用的意义。在能力培养方面,通过解读数据,培养学生的探究能力。 [典型例题剖析] 例1、把发蔫的菠菜泡在清水中,菠菜又重新挺起来,这说明( ) A 、水就是光合作用的原料 B 、水就是溶解与运输物质的溶剂 C 、水能保持植物体固有的姿态 D 、水就是植物体重要的组成成分 [解析]:植物体内只有水分充足时,才能保持挺立的姿态,叶片才能舒展,有利于光合作用。本题没有数据说明水就是植物体的重要组成成分,也没有说明水就是如何作为溶剂来溶解无机盐的。本题考察学生对植物需水原因的分析与理解。答案:C 例2、下图所示,植物吸收水分的主要部位就是( ) [解析]:根尖成熟区就是吸水的主要部位,表皮细胞突起,形成大量根毛,大大增加了吸水的面积。本题主要考察学生识图的能力。答案:A 例3、3月12日就是我国的全民植树节,之所以选择这个时候,就是因为( ) A 、正值农闲时节 B 、土壤松散 C 、雨水较多 D 、叶没长出,蒸腾作用很弱 3、绿色植物参与生物圈的水循环

生态环境绿色标杆企业创建方案

市生态环境绿色标杆企业创建 实施方案（试行） 为深入贯彻落实生态环境部《关于加强重污染天气应对夯实应急减排措施的指导意见》和《市打赢蓝天保卫战作战方案暨2018-2020年大气污染防治攻坚行动实施方案》，激励企业积极创建环保绿色标杆，主动减排，制定本方案。 一、总体要求 全面贯彻落实党的十九大精神和绿色发展理念，坚持“污染排放空间换时间”原则，鼓励企业切实承担污染治理主体责任，强化企业自我监管，积极落实各项减排措施。对达到绿色标杆标准的企业，在错峰生产和重污染天气应急（红色应急除外）期间，实行差别化管理，准予不停产、不限产，实现生产经营和污染减排的双赢。 二、实施范围 钢铁、焦化、炭素、陶瓷、玻璃、石灰窑、铸造、炼油与石油化工、制药、农药、涂料、油墨、工业锅炉、页岩砖、木业加工、表面涂装、家具、印刷（限书报刊、本册平板印刷、无VOCs排放的数字印刷）。（其他行业绿色标杆创建标准根据污染治理进程补充制定。） 三、创建要求 （一）基本要求 企业建设和运行有合法手续，上年度亩产效益评级为良好以上、 - 1 -

无重大环境投诉及群体性上访、未发生重大环境事故、没有被国家和省各类督察巡查发现问题并通报、无环境违法排污行为，按要求实现废气污染物排放在线监控，开展自行监测并实现信息公开，有完善的环保管理制度并有专职环保管理人员。 （二）行业创建标准 各行业创建标准见附件1。 四、豁免政策 对于列入错峰生产、重污染应急减排清单企业，达到绿色标杆企业创建标准要求的，在错峰生产、重污染应急（红色除外）期间免予停产、限产（国家和省明确规定必须执行停限产要求的除外）。 五、实施程序 采用企业自愿申报、县区审核、社会公示、市级核发的工作方式，开展生态环境绿色标杆企业认定工作。 （一）企业申报。按照企业自愿参与的原则，由企业向所在县区大气办提交绿色标杆企业申请表（见附件2，纸质版，A4纸打印并装订成册，一式三份）和电子版。 （二）县区审核。各县区大气办依据绿色标杆企业创建标准和豁免政策对申请表进行复核，筛选出符合条件、综合评价较高的绿色标杆企业。 （三）社会公示。对遴选出的绿色标杆企业，各县区大气办在官方网站和主流媒体进行公示，公示时间不少于5个工作日。对公示无异议的企业，报市大气办备案。 - 2 -

小学语文小班化教学案例

小学语文小班化教学案例 -----培养学生自主与合作学习能力的协调发展 一、案例背景 语文课程标准中指出：“倡导自主、合作、探究的学习方式”，由此可见，自主学习与合作探究的学习方式已成为课程改革的目标之一。那么，如何使自主学习与合作探究的学习方式在我们小班化课堂教学中有用地进行呢？通过自己的教学实践，我感到，教师要善于根据学生特点，为他们创设自主与合作学习的条件，才能确实使自主与合作学习落到实处，而不会是“看似课堂上热热闹闹，实则只是摆摆花架子而无实效性”的局面。下面，我就《我为你骄慢》一课的教学作了尝试。《我为你骄慢》是二年级下册一篇叙事性的文章，故事中的小男孩不小心打碎了老奶奶家的玻璃，当时害怕逃跑了，但后来用自己的行动取得老奶奶的原谅，老奶奶为小男孩感到骄慢。教学时，我给他们充分地自读自悟的机会，给他们个性化表达的机会，同时充分利用小班化小组学习的条件，进行组内合作学习，学会讨论、交流。 二、案例描述 1、解放读课文，要求读准字音、读通句子。 2、旁桌互认生字。 3、组长检查词语。 4、想想小男孩和老奶奶之间发生了什么事。根据下面的提示说一说：送报的小男孩，后来。老奶奶为小男孩感到。 （学生从自主学习到组内合作、交流，参与的主动性、积极性很高，学习气氛非常浓重。） 片段二：叙说故事情节； 1、默读课文1、2自然段，然后试着用自己的话向大家介绍“我打碎玻璃”的详尽经过。小组内练说，指名说。 2、引读第三自然段。

说话：我觉得很不自在，是因为。 生1：我觉得很不自在，是因为我打碎了老奶奶家的玻璃，难以为情见老奶奶。 生2：我觉得很不自在，是因为我担心老奶奶知道。 生3：我觉得很不自在，是因为我做了错事，老奶奶却还微笑着对我。 生4：我觉得很不自在，是因为我很后悔逃跑，感到良心不安。 3、默读四、五自然段，说说我是如何向老奶奶道歉的。 提供词语帮助说话： 三个星期过去了攒钱便条信封 xx悄悄地信箱松弛 小组内练说、指名说。 （通过叙说故事情节，让学生将课文的语言有用地迁移于自己的言语实践，这个要求对于中下层次的学生来说有难度，但是先让学生在小组内练习，让小组里会说的同学先说，能为中下层次的同学提供互助学习的机会，形成了一个优良的学习小环境。） 片段三：说话训练； 师：老奶奶为小男孩的什么而骄慢呢？ 生1：为他的厚道。 生2：为他的英勇。 师引导：这叫敢于承担责任。 生3：为他的知错就改。 师：当小男孩看到“我为你骄慢”的便条时是什么样的心情？

初中生物《生物圈中的绿色植物》单元教学设计以及思维导图

初中生物《生物圈中的绿色植物》单元教学设计以及思维导图1 《生物圈中的绿色植物》主题单元教学设计适用年级六年级 所需时间课内共用7课时，每周3课时 主题单元学习概述 本单元是山东科技出版社五四制，生物学六年级下册。本教材改变了以前教材过分强调学科体系完整性的状况，对分类学知识不再详细描述，降低了知识的难度，注重从学 生的生活经验出发，把提高学生的生物科学素养放在首位,重点是植物和生活环境相适应 的特征及在生物圈和人类的关系。 教材的知识编排结构是从生活环境、基本特征、在生物圈中的作用以及与人类的关系等几个方面进行讲述的，既可以对前面生物与环境相互影响的知识进一步巩固和深化， 又可以为后面学习绿色植物对生物圈的重大意义打下基础。本章节安排三节内容，“藻类、苔藓和蕨类植物和种子子植物，”这些植物放在一章内有利于学生对这三类植物的 特征进行横向的比较。 主题单元规划思维导图 主题单元学习目标 知识目标: (1)概述藻类、苔藓和蕨类植物的形态特征与生活环境。(2)了解藻类、苔藓和蕨类植物对生物圈的作用及与人类的关系。(3)知道种子的结构，明白玉米种子和菜豆种子的区别。(4)了解种子植物分为被子植物和裸子植物的依据并能够举例。能力目标: (1)通过对图片的观看、实物的观察，培养和训练观察能力和思维能力。 (2)通过讨论交流和展示，培养团队协作和归纳表达能力。情感态度与价值观: (1)关注生物圈中各种绿色植物及其生存状况，增强同学们的环保意识。 (2)通过展示交流，树立自信自强心。 对应课标:

1.初步具有收集、鉴别和利用课内外的图文资料及其他信息的能力。 2.关注绿色植物的生存状况，形成环保意识。 3.描述细胞分裂的基本过程。 4.描述各类植物的主要特征和生活环境。 5.说出植物在自然界的作用和人类的关系。 主题单元问题设 生物圈中有哪些绿色植物, 计 专题一:藻类植物 (2课时) 专题二:苔藓和蕨类植物 专题划分 (2课时) 专题三:种子植物 (3课时) 专题一专题一藻类植物 所需课时本专题使用2课时 专题一概述 本专题内容在整个单元中起到引导的作用。通过本专题的学习，学生能够知道藻类植物的基本特征和生活环境，明白藻类植物在自然界中的作用及人类对藻类植物的利用。 专题学习目标 知识目标: 概述藻类植物的主要特征和生活环境。 能力目标: 说出藻类植物在自然界中的作用和与人类的关系。 情感态度价值观: 关注藻类植物的生存现状，形成环保意识。

绿色企业行动宣传标语

绿色企业行动宣传标语 标语，绿色企业行动宣传标语 1、绿色发展，有你才有意义，绿色建设，有你才更完美。 2、环保不分民族，生态没有国界。 3、绿色环保构建美好家园，优质服务打造精致企业。 4、碧水蓝天是我家，绿色生产靠大家。 5、青山绿水要靠你我他共同来维护。 6、打造一流绿色企业，为美好生活加油。 7、美丽油田，我是行动者。 8、落实绿色发展，央企责无旁贷。 9、树立水务形象，协调生产与水。 10、绿色企业，绿色家园，绿色企业，绿色中国。 11、做好环保每一处，携手共护水乡缘。 12、山不言，默背负；水不语，静容纳；绿水青山美石化。 13、树立绿色形象，协调生产与水。 14、保护环境光荣，污染环境可耻。 15、少开车，多步走，活到九十九。 16、石化应有自己的色彩。 17、践行绿色发展理念，守护美丽水乡油田。 18、守护水乡油田，奉献绿色能源。 19、绿色科技，人文内涵——中石化，可持续发展的践行者 20、倡低碳减排之风，走持续发展之路。 21、绿化美化净化看石化，靠你靠我靠他靠大家。 22、让我们与绿色同行，让绿色与我们共生。 23、绿色采购绿色供应，转型发展新愿景。 24、做好维护保养，杜绝跑冒滴漏。 25、垃圾分类，达标排放；保护环境，造福人民。 26、坚持企业优化，促进环境保护。

27、与绿色拥抱，生活更美好。 28、回家吧，回到绿色生产的美好。 29、环保是健康之基，绿色是和谐之源 30、坚持水务发展，促进环境保护。 31、用我们的双手，描绘绿色的家园。 32、绿色成就石化。 33、绿色环保低碳行，节能创效做先锋。 34、低碳环保，绿色生产，我们一直在行动。 35、保护石化环境，共建绿色家园。 36、守护蓝天白云，碧水青山，绿色石化等你回家。 37、万绿丛中一点“石化”。 38、汽油柴油，不如绿水长流；春风十里，不如绿色有你。 39、足下留一寸，换来四时春。 40、让中国石化阳光普照，让绿色企业神圣美妙。 41、水乡油田我的家，绿色生产人人夸。 42、绿色石化福社会，青山绿水笑开颜。 43、建优美环境，筑优良业绩，做优秀社管人。 44、让家园更美，让生活更好。 45、绿色发展，科技创新——中石化，带您畅享低碳生活。 46、垃圾分类回收是物有价值，分类投放是人有素质。 47、共建青山绿水，共享幸福安康。 48、聚焦碧水蓝天净土心动，攻关安全环保节能技术。 49、爱的魔力转圈圈，绿色生产让人心花怒放不知疲倦。 50、手牵手维护绿色家园，心连心构筑和谐石化。 51、爱护环境，是我们每一位石油人应尽的责任。 52、发展诚可贵，效益价更高；若为环保故，两者皆可抛。 53、开发资源立足绿色生态，油气稳产呵护碧水蓝天。 54、石化实说：我喜欢绿色。 55、将绿色进行到底，让绿荫遍布天下。

小班化语文教学案例——《清平乐-村居》

小班化语文教学案例——《清平乐村居》 【设计理念】 在课程标准的理念指导下，结合小班化教学的特点，本课的教学设计力求体现：1、师生、生生的互动。2、教学与活动相结合。3、面向全体，异质教学。4、针对个体，同质活动。 【教学内容】 《清平乐村居》是小学语文五年级上册的一篇课文。课文描绘了一幅充满农村生活气息的田园图景。词的上阕长短句相间，而下阕句式整齐，每句韵脚相同，节奏感强。全词描绘了南方一户农家生活劳动的场景：二老融洽，孩子孝顺，老有所养，少有所事，温馨、淳朴，自然。 【学习目标】 １．正确、流利、在感情地朗读课文，在读中感悟田园生活的意境。使学生从中受到美的熏陶；背诵课文。 ２．学会本课５个生字。理解由生字组成的词语。 ３．初步了解词的有关知识。 ４．理解这首词的意思。想象这首词所描绘的情景，并在说的基础上写下来。 【学习小组的建构】 本课的学习小组先采用异质组合的分组法，再采用异质组队的分组法。根据各项语文学习能力（思维能力、朗读能力、书写能力、口语表达能力等）的强弱进行组合。本班共有24人，分为6组，每组4人，分别为1,2,3,4号。把1、2、3、4号同学，在异质组合的分组法中1、2、3、4号同学作为学习伙伴，其中1号为本小组组长，语文阅读，书写等综合能力较强，2号为本小组中相对较弱的同学，3,4号属于中等水平。在异质组队的分组法所有1号的同学座位一组，所有2号的同学也作为一组，所有3号一组，所有4号一组为一组。 【教学过程】 一．导入新课 1.、师：读读我们以前学过的课文，也有一种情趣，我们二年级学过词串： 金秋烟波水乡 芦苇菱藕荷塘 夕阳归舟渔歌 枫叶灯火月光

《新课标下高中数学概念教学的实践与研究》

《新课标下高中数学概念教学的实践与研究》 课题开题报告 浙江温州第二十二中学高洪武325000 一、课题提出的背景及现实意义 新一轮课程改革已经在全国部分省市如火如荼地开展，为了进一步扩大普通高中新课程实验范围，教育部决定从2006年秋季起，福建、浙江、辽宁和安徽4省将全面进入普通高中新课程实验。这将意味着我省教师将真正意义上进入新课程教学的实践与研究了。作为高中数学教师，理所当然将在这一实验过程中扮演着重要的角色。在新课程理念下，对构建数学理论大厦的数学概念如何实施教学是摆在每一位老师面前的一个严峻的课题。 高中数学课程标准指出：数学教学中应加强对基本概念和基本思想的理解和掌握，对一些核心概念和基本思想要贯穿高中数学教学的始终，帮助学生逐步加深理解。长期以来，由于受应试教育的影响，不少数学教师重解题、轻概念造成数学解题与概念脱节、学生对概念含混不清，一知半解，不能很好地理解和运用概念。数学课堂变成了教师进行学生解题技能培训的场所；而学生成了解题的机器，整天机械地按照老师灌输的“程序”进行简单的重复劳作。严重影响了学生思维的发展，能力的提高。这与新课程大力倡导的培养学生探究能力与创新精神已严重背离。那么在新课标下如何才能帮助学生更好、更加深刻地理解数学概念；如何才能灵活地应用数学概念解决数学问题，我想关键的环节还是在于教师如何实施数学概念教学，为此“新课标下高中数学概念教学的实践与研究”课题在这样的背景下应运而生。 二、国内外关于同类课题的研究综述和课题研究的理论依据 1.国内外关于同类课题的研究综述： 国内外关于数学概念教学理论研究是比较多的，对于一些概念课授课方法也是有研究的。但是那些理论的得出和经验的总结都是特定教育环境下的产物；而对于今天所推进的新课程实验（特别是在我国刚刚开始实施阶段），高中数学概念教学理论研究还几乎是一片空白。对于实践研究就更不足为谈了。 2. 课题研究的理论依据: 2-1 一般来说，数学概念要经历感知、理解、保持和应用四种心理过程。数学概念教学主要依据有如下理论： （1）联结理论、媒介理论：联结理论把概念的掌握过程解释为各种特征的重叠过程，尤如用照相机拍摄下来的事物在底片上的重叠，能够冲洗出照片一样。即接受外界刺激然后做出相应的反应。而媒介理论认为内部过程存在一种媒介因素，并用它来解释复杂的人类行动。 （2）同化、顺应理论：皮亚杰认为，概念的掌握过程无非是经历了一个同化与顺应的过程；所谓同化，就是把新概念、新知识接纳入到一个已知的认知结构中去；所谓顺应，就是当原有的认知结构不能纳入新概念时，必须改变已有的认知结构，以适应新概念。 （3）假设理论：假设理论不同于联结理论把概念掌握的过程看成是一个消极被动的过程，并认为学生掌握概念是一个积极制造概念的过程。所谓积极制造概念的过程，就是根据事实进行抽象、推理、概括、提出假设，并将这一假设应用于日后遇到的事例中加以检验的

初中生物生物圈中的绿色植物知识点

初中生物生物圈中的绿 色植物知识点 Company number【1089WT-1898YT-1W8CB-9UUT-92108】

第三单元 生物圈中的绿色植物 第一章 生物圈中有哪些绿色植物 1、绿色植物分为四大类群：藻类、苔藓、蕨类、种子植物 一、藻类、苔藓、蕨类植物 2、藻类、苔藓、蕨类植物的区别： 3、藻类，苔藓，蕨类植物的共同点：藻类，苔藓，蕨类植物都不结种子， 它们的叶片背面有孢子囊群，可产生孢子，称为孢子植物，孢子是一种生殖细胞，在温暖潮湿的地方才能萌发和生长，所以说孢子植物的生活离不开水。 4.藻类植物：“春水绿于染” 5.藻类植物既有单细胞，也有多细胞。既有生活在淡水中，也有海水中。 6.多细胞藻类植物整个身体浸没在水中，几乎全身都可以吸收水和无机盐。可以进行光合作用，但没有专门吸收和运输养料以及进行光合作用的器官。 藻类植物 苔藓植物 蕨类植物 生活环境 大多数生活在水中 阴湿陆地上 阴湿陆地上 形态结构特征 没有根、茎、叶的分化 矮小，有茎和叶的分化（茎中无导管，叶中无叶脉），根是假根 有根茎叶的分化，有输导组 织 与人类关 系 释放氧气 监测空气污染的指示植物 遗体形成煤 矿 常见种类 水绵，衣藻，海带等 墙藓，葫芦藓等 肾蕨，满江红等

7.藻类植物没有根茎叶的分化。 8.苔藓植物生存在阴湿环境中。有类似根和茎的分化，但是茎中没有导管，叶中没有叶脉，根很简单，称为假根，具有固定作用。 9.苔藓植物可作为监测空气污染程度的指示植物。 10.蕨类植物：有根茎叶的分化，具有输导组织。有些蕨类植物比较高大。 11.蕨类植物用处：①卷柏、贯众可药用②满江红是一种优良绿肥和饲料③蕨类植物遗体层层堆积，经过漫长年代、复杂变化，逐渐变成了煤。 12.藻类植物，苔藓植物，蕨类植物，生殖依靠孢子，所以也被统称为孢子植物。 第二节 二、种子植物 1.、种子的结构 菜豆种子：种皮、胚(胚芽、胚轴、胚根、2片子叶)【双子叶植物，网状叶脉】 玉米种子：果皮和种皮、胚(胚芽、胚轴、胚根、1片子叶)、胚乳【单子叶植物，平行叶脉】 种皮：保护里面幼嫩的胚。 胚：新植物体的幼体，由胚芽（发育成茎和叶）、胚轴（发育成连接根和茎的部位）、胚根（发育成根）和子叶组成。胚乳不是胚的结构。 2、子叶和胚乳里有营养物质，供给胚发育成幼苗。 3、菜豆种子中与子叶相连的结构是胚轴，玉米种子中滴加碘液变蓝的结构 是胚乳，说明胚乳中含有淀粉。

企业环保标语口号

企业环保标语口号 导读：本文是关于标语大全的文章，如果觉得很不错，欢迎点评和分享！ 1、节能为环保，财富为健康。 2、争做环保使者，共创绿色文明。 3、环保创造健康，财富携手自由。 4、支持环保，别让你的健康与财富自由流失。 5、为环保献力，为自己添富。 6、环保进万家，财富赢天下。 7、绿色的，健康的；节能的，世界的。 8、环保障，自然情，人康健，子孙福。 9、以美与人，用善待己。 10、人与自然需要和谐共存。 11、保护生态环境，倡导礼貌新风。 12、践行环保理念，扞卫健康生活。 13、保护环境，保存希望。 14、环保新主义，财富由你创，健康自然来。 15、健康环保，畅享自由财富。 16、青山常在，绿水常流。 17、生态环保，节能先锋，享受生活。 18、共创绿色世界，自由追寻梦想。

19、保护环境，持续发展。 20、这天节约一滴水，留给后人一滴血。 21、守护健康人生，畅享财富自由。 22、产品买环保，处理少烦恼。 23、全面建设小康社会，同心共创完美家园。 24、需求无限，资源有限；善用有限，发展无限。 25、有限的资源，无限的循环。 26、以法保护自然环境，以德建立社会礼貌。 27、环保生活，健康财富。 28、做良心企业，为您的完美生活的保驾护航。 29、改善环境，创建美好未来是我们共同的愿望。 30、欣赏荒野、回归自然。 31、天蓝水清，地绿居佳。 32、心飞翔，身康健，天下一片绿色。 33、与环保同行，与财富共进。 34、用心迎接挑战，实现持续发展。 35、环保畅享绿色人生，健康乐活财富自由。 36、做世界一流环保产品，让地球人都身体康健，给财富自由的翅膀。 37、环保健康手牵手，财富自由心连心。 38、绿色是性命之源，绿色是人类之根。 39、美好的环境来自我们每个人的珍惜和维护。

初中生物绿色植物试题

姓名 __________ 班级 _____________________ 一、选择题 3.春季玉米播种后，接着下了一场大雨，土壤长时间浸水结果玉米出苗很少，其 原因主要是 A. 土壤中养分流失 B. 土壤的派度过低 C. 土壤中水分不足 D. 土壤中空气不足 9. 百色市右江河谷是全国着名的亚热带水果基地、 南菜北运基地和“芒果之乡”， 盛产芒果、荔枝等名优水果。芒果、甜美多汁的芒果肉和芒果种子分别是由花的 哪些结构发育而来的 4.一粒小小的种子能长成参天大树，主要是因为种子中具有 A. 胚芽 B .胚 C.胚乳 7?图1为桃花的结构示意图，图中④ 在受精作用完成后，将发育成 A .种子 B .种皮 C. 果实 D.果皮 9. 农业生产中的施肥，主要为农作物的生长提供 A .有机物 B .水 C.无机盐 D. 氧气 10. 呼吸作用的实质是 A .分解有机物，释放能量 B .合成有机物，释放能量 C.分解有机物，贮存能量 D.合成有机物，贮存能量 11. 自然界中，被称为“天然的碳氧平衡器”的生物是 A .植物 B .动物 C.病毒 D.细菌和真菌 13. 植物体吸收和运输水分的主要结构分别是 A .根毛、导管 B .导管、根毛 C.根毛、根毛 D.导管、导管 14. “芒果、龙眼、荔枝”是百色市右江河谷盛产的名优水果，按植物的类群来分，它们都属于 A.子房、子房壁、胚珠 B. 子房壁、子房、胚珠 C. 子房、胚珠、子房壁 D. 胚珠、子房、子房壁 D.子叶 两 1

A.藻类植物 B.蕨类植物 C.裸子植物 D.被子植物 15. “人间四月芳菲尽，山寺桃花始盛开”。造成这一差异的非生物因素主要是

企业使命标语环保

企业使命标语环保 导读：本文是关于标语大全的文章，如果觉得很不错，欢迎点评和分享！ 1、健康又环保，财富自由少不了。 2、开环保新天，辟绿色未来。 3、环保新主义，财富由你创，健康自然来！ 4、环保一小步，健康一大步。 5、发展中国环保事业，提高民族健康水平，实现百姓财富自由。 6、美在生态，乐在健康，财富自由，创新追求。 7、环保一份心，享受健康财富生活。 8、健康新节能，绿色自由风。 9、节能环保缔造健康生活，健康生活成就财富自由。 10、绿色环保，造福于民。 11、蓝天白云，绿水青山；我们的努力，自然的美丽。 12、多环保，多健康，更多财富自由。 13、做节能环保小卫士，创自由财富新生活。 14、以环保赢得健康，以品质换来财富自由。 15、领军环保节能行业，共创健康美好生活，享受财富自由明天。 16、争做节能环保企业标杆，缔造健康财富自由生活。

17、绿色节能，创造财富。 18、低碳生活，让你要拥有一切。 19、健康有保障，财富更自由。 20、呼吸洁净空气，享受财富生活。 21、环保生活，健康一生，财富自由，不悔此生。 22、现在做环保，未来当富豪。 23、环保是健康的保证，健康是财富的本钱，财富是自由的天地。 24、节能为环保，财富为健康。 25、悠然一心，财富自由。 26、做节能环保小先锋，享自由财富新生活。 27、健康，环保，财富，三者良性循环。 28、环保创财富，健康奔自由。 29、快乐环保，享受健康，经济自由。 30、做世界一流环保产品，让地球人都身体康健，给财富自由的翅膀。 31、尽环保力量，谋健康财富。 32、践行环保理念，扞卫健康生活。 33、节能就是创造财富，节能就是环保健康。 34、打造中国最优节能环保品牌。 35、更环保，更健康，更自由。 36、环保靠大家，健康你我他，财富和自由就有啦。

小班化小学语文课堂教学模式

小班化小学语文课堂教学模式 凤凰镇何田小学朱建平 小班化教学是建立在素质教育高标准，高要求的教育质量观和现代办学效益观基础上，充分发发挥“小班”本质特征的教学模式。现就有关教学策略方面浅谈几点体会。 一、教学方式的重组 在小班化教学模式中，师生之间的互动关系应得到增强和增加。 1、建立和谐的师生关系。教学是师生间交流沟通的过程，教师要和学生共同分享对教材的理解、课堂给予的快乐。教师的责任就是要成为学生学习的引导者、帮扶者和促进者。教师要转变教育观念，关心学生的心理需求，尊重学生的个性表达，营造一种平等宽容、健康和谐的课堂教学氛围。 2、营造浓郁学习氛围的教室环境。学生是课堂教学的主体，小班化教室环境的布置要以学生为本位，从有利于学生学习成长、有利于教师实施个别化教学去考虑。要把教室布置成为一个学习中心，营造浓郁的书香氛围。如可以在教室内悬挂励志格言、经典名句，张贴学生优秀作品，设立班级小书库，在课桌椅的排列上采取个体独立式或小组组合式，摆放成圆形、方框形、辩论型式、等等，以方便学生开展自学思考、课堂练习和进行一些互动沟通、讨论交流。 3、创设科学的教学情境。教师要注意采取各种方法激发学生强烈的求知欲望，引导学生迅速进入最佳语文学习状态，使他们在兴趣盎然的心理气氛中，跟着教师进入新知识的探索过程中。从教学需要出发，营造或创设与教学内容相适应的场景，力求生动、形象、有趣，以激发他们学习的兴趣，引起学生的情感体验，帮助学生迅速而正确地理解教材内容，促进儿童知识的、能力的、智力的、情感意志的尽可能大的发展。 二、自主探究策略 尊重和落实学生在课堂教学中的主体地位，注重学生在课堂内的自主探究，还学生以学习主动权，让学生有独立认知、思考的过程，是新课改的重要理念之

新课标下如何进行高中数学概念教学

新课标下如何进行高中数学概念教学 发表时间：2011-01-26T17:01:56.810Z 来源：《少年智力开发报》2010年第9期供稿作者：杨昆 [导读] 如何在这一要求下进行数学概念教学？我认为抓好概念教学是提高数学教学质量的最关键的一环。 贵州省平塘民族中学杨昆 教师应该准确地提示概念的内涵与外延，使学生深刻理解概念，并在解决各类问题时灵活应用数学概念是新课标下数学概念的教学要求。因此正确理解数学概念，是掌握数学基础知识的前提。如何在这一要求下进行数学概念教学？我认为抓好概念教学是提高数学教学质量的最关键的一环。下面我从引入概念、解析概念、巩固概念三个方面谈谈对概念教学。 一、引入概念 概念教学中要引导学生经历从具体的实例抽象出数学概念的过程．因此引入数学概念就要以具体的典型材料和实例为基础，揭示概念形成的实际背景，要创设好的问题情境，帮助学生完成由材料感知到理性认识的过渡，并引导学生把背景材料与原有认知结构建立实质性联系．下面介绍几种引入数学概念的方法： 1.从实际生活中，引入新概念。 新课标强调“数学教学要紧密联系学生的生活实际”．在数学概念的引入上，尽可能地选取学生日常生活中熟悉的事例． 2.创设问题情境，引入新概念。 教师要善于恰当地创设趣味性、探索性的问题情境，激发学生概念学习的兴趣，使学生能够从问题分析中，归纳和抽象出概念的本质特征，这样形成的概念才容易被学生理解和接受。 3. 从最近概念引入新概念。 数学概念具有很强的系统性。数学概念往往是“抽象之上的抽象”，先前的概念往往是后续概念的基础，从而形成了数学概念的系统。公理化体系就是这种系统性的最高反映。教学中充分利用学生头脑中已有的知识与相关的经验引入概念，使相应的具体经验升华为理性认识，不仅能使学生准确地理解概念的形式定义，而且有利于建立起关于概念的恰当心理表征。使学生对知识的积累变成对知识的融合。 二、解析概念 生动恰当的引入概念，只是概念教学的第一步，，要使学生真正掌握新概念，还必须多角度、多方位的解析概念。对概念理解不深刻，解题时就会出现这样或那样的错误，要正确而深刻地理解一个概念并不是一件容易的事，教师要根据学生的知识结构和能力特点，从多方面着手，适当地引导学生正确地分析解剖概念，充分认识概念的科学性，抓住概念的本质。因此，教师要充分利用概念课，培养学生的能力，训练学生的思维，使学生认识到数学概念，既是进一步学习数学的理论基础，又是进行再认识的工具。为此，我们可以从以下几个方面努力，加深对概念的理解。 1.用数学符号语言解析概念。数学教学体现了数学语言的特点，数学语言无非是文字叙述、符号表示、图形表示三者之间的转换，当然要会三者的翻译，同时更重要的是强调符号感。引进数学符号以后，应当引导学生把符号与它所代表的实质内容联系起来，使学生在看到符号时就能够联想起符号所代表的概念及其本质特征。事实上，如果概念的符号能够与概念的实质内容建立起内在联系，那么，符号的掌握可以提高学生的抽象能力、概括能力。数学中的逻辑推理关键就在于能够合理、恰当地应用符号，而这又要依靠对符号的实质意义的把握。在概念学习中，形式地掌握符号而不懂得符号的本质涵义的情况是经常发生的，这时符号将使知识学习产生困难，导致数学推理的错误。 2.用图形语言解析概念。数与形的结合是使学生正确理解和深刻体会概念的好方法，数形结合妙用无穷，教学中凡是“数”与“形”能够结合起来讲的，一定要尽量结合起来讲。 3.逆向分析，加深对概念的理解。人的思维是可逆的，但必须有意识地去培养这种逆向思维活动的能力。对某些概念还应从多方面设问并思考。 4.讲清数学概念之内涵和外延，沟通知识的内在联系。概念反映的所有对象的共同本质属性的总和，叫做这个概念的内涵，又称涵义。适合于概念所指的对象的全体，叫做这个概念的外延，又称范围。 5.揭示概念与概念之间的区别与联系,使新概念与已有认知结构中的有关概念建立联系,把新概念纳入到已有概念体系中,同化新概念。教学中，应将相近、相反或容易混淆的概念放到一块来对比讲解，从定义、图形、性质等各方面进行分析对比，从而正确理解把握概念.。 三、巩固概念 学生认识和形成概念，理解和掌握之后，巩固概念是一个不可缺少的环节。巩固的主要手段是多练习、多运用，只有这样才能沟通概念、定理、法则、性质、公式之间的内存联系。我们可以选择概念性、典型性的习题，加强概念本质的理解，使学生最终理解和掌握数学思想方法。例如，当学习完“向量的坐标”这一概念之后，进行向量的坐标运算，提出问题：已知平行四边形ABCD的三个顶点ABC的坐标分别是(1,2),(2,4),(0,2),试求顶点D的坐标。学生展开充分的讨论，不少学生运用平面解析几何中学过的知识（如两点间的距离公式、斜率、直线方程、中点坐标公式等），结合平行四边形的性质，提出了各种不同的解法，有的学生应用共线向量的概念给出了解法，还有一些学生运用所学过向量坐标的概念，把点D的坐标和向量CD的坐标联系起来，巧妙地解答了这一问题。学生通过对问题的思考，尽快地投入到新概念的探索中去，从而激发了学生的好奇以及探索和创造的欲望，使学生在参与的过程中产生内心的体验和创造。除此之外，教师通过反例、错解等进行辨析，也有利于学生巩固概念。 总之，在中学数学概念的教学中，只要针对学生实际和概念的具体特点，注重引入，加强分析，重视训练，辅以灵活多样的教法，使学生准确地理解和掌握概念，才能更好地完成数学概念的教学任务，从而有效地提高数学教学质量。