中文摘要：

【摘要】目的：考察具有反刍思维倾向的个体在认知功能上是否存在抑制缺失，探究其不能抑制负性无关刺激的现象，以帮助解释抑郁、反刍思维对个体产生影响的认知机制。方法：招募52名在校大学生，采用Beck抑郁问卷（BDI）和反刍思维量表（RRS）测量其抑郁和反刍思维程度。根据反刍思维量表的得分，以中位数（48．5）作为分界点，确定高／低反刍思维分组各26名。被试被随机分入启动条件或非启动条件（n=26），进行主动遗忘任务的实验。实验过程中被试需要就遗忘词表（记忆词表）中出现的正性／负性情绪词汇进行词性判断。被试以自陈报告的方法，回忆两个词表中出现的词汇，记录被试对各词表正／负性词汇正确回忆率。结果：反刍思维高分组对遗忘词表的回忆率高于反刍思维低分组[（44．2±15．2）％VS．（35．6±13．1）％，P〈0．05]，对于记忆词表的回忆率低于反刍思维低分组[（30．6±11．3）％VS．（41．4±11．6）％，P〈0．01]。启动条件下，被试对遗忘词表的回忆率高于非启动条件下的被试[（44．2±14．7）％VS．（35．6±13．6）％，P〈0．05]；反刍高分组被试对负性情绪词汇的回忆率高于对正性情绪词汇[（53．0±17．3）％VS．（47．0±17．3）％，P〈0．05]。以BDI得分作为协变量，实验条件与词性间的交互作用无统计学意义（P〉0．05），实验条件与启动条件交互作用无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。结论：研究结果提示反刍思维与抑制功能缺失有关，高反刍个体对无关刺激存在认知抑制缺失，这种认知功能的缺失可能部分源于其抑郁水平的影响，但影响方式需进一步研究确定。

英文摘要：

[ Abstract ] Objective： To investigate whether the individual who have tendency to rumination will show inhib- itory dysfunctions on cognition functions and explore the phenomenon of not inhibiting negative irrelevant stimulus, in order to learn more about how the depression, rumination thinking impact on the individual cognitive mechanisms. Methods： Totally 52 college students participated the research. They were assessed with the Beck De- pression Inventory （BDI） and Rumination Thinking Scale （RRS） to evaluate the levels of depression and rumina- tion. According to the participants scores on RRS, the median （48.5） were as the cutoff point to determine the higher/lower rumination group （26 in each group）. Participants were randomly divided into priming condition group or non-priming condition group （26 in each group） to have the direct-forgot task experiment. They were in- structed to decide whether the presented words were positive or negative in the forget vocabulary （remember vocab- ulary） and remember the words at the same time. Finally, participants were asked to recall the words which ap- peared in two vocabulary words by self report methods and the experiment recorded the rates of correctness. Results： The higher rumination group recalled more words from the forget vocabulary than the lower ru- mination group [（44. 2 ±15.2）% vs. （35.6 ±13.1）%, P 〈0. 05] and the lower rumination group recalled more words from the remember vocabulary than the higher rumination group [ （30. 6 ±11.3）% vs. （41.4 ±11.6）%, P 〈 0. 01]. The priming condition group recalled more words from forget vocabulary than the non-priming condition group [（44. 2 ±14.7）% vs. （35.6 ± 13.6）%, P 〈0. 05]. Under start up condition, the high rumination group re- called more negative words than positive words [ （ 53.0 ± 17. 3） % vs. （47.0 ±17.3） %, P 〈 0. 05 ]. The significant- ly decreased after the subjects＇depression scores as covariates were statistically. The interac