No description available.

Kyoto University (京都大学) / 0048 / 新制・課程博士 / 博士(工学) / 甲第15318号 / 工博第3197号 / 新制||工||1481(附属図書館) / 27796 / 京都大学大学院工学研究科建築学専攻 / (主査)教授 鉾井 修一, 教授 田中 哮義, 教授 髙橋 大弐 / 学位規則第4条第1項該当

京都大学 / 新制・課程博士 / 博士(工学) / 甲第23189号 / 工博第4833号 / 新制||工||1755(附属図書館) / 京都大学大学院工学研究科建築学専攻 / (主査)教授 小椋 大輔, 教授 高野 靖, 准教授 伊庭 千恵美, 教授 原田 和典 / 学位規則第4条第1項該当 / Doctor of Philosophy (Engineering) / Kyoto University / DFAM

本研究為能瞭解多巴胺在壓力源引發個體古典制約行為學習中的參與角色，採用一個與多巴胺相關的場地制約偏好行為作為研究工具，並利用一較溫和的禁錮壓力源作為非制約刺激與場地環境制約刺激進行配對制約。本研究假設內側前額葉皮質處的多巴胺參與在此壓力源引發場地制約行為學習中。實驗一針對單次禁錮壓力源的非制約刺激效果進行檢驗，分別檢測壓力源對個體的生理、情緒或是行為活動量的影響。實驗二利用「同時制約」或是「倒序制約」等兩種制約方式來進行單次禁錮壓力源引發場地制約偏好行為作業，並分別於制約程序的不同時間點施予多巴胺專屬受器拮抗劑，檢驗多巴胺在制約行為學習作業中的參與。實驗三在「同時制約」或是「倒序制約」兩種制約程序中的不同時間點，施予局部麻醉藥物二丁卡因暫時抑制內側前額葉皮質活動，以檢驗該區塊在單次禁錮壓力源引發場地制約偏好行為下的參與角色。實驗四為了解內側前額葉皮質處多巴胺在單次禁錮壓力源引發場地制約偏好行為中的角色，在「同時制約」程序的不同時間點施打多巴胺專屬受器拮抗劑至內側前額葉皮質區。 實驗結果發現：本研究所使用的單次30分鐘禁錮壓力源，確實可以引發實驗動物體內的壓力賀爾蒙糖皮質素大量增加、提高焦慮情緒或是降低自發性行為活動量。單次禁錮壓力源在「同時制約」或是「倒序制約」等兩種制約程序下，都能建立場地制約偏好行為。在禁錮壓力源操弄「之前」或「之後」，周邊施打多巴胺D1或是D2專屬受器拮抗劑，在「同時制約」或是「倒序制約」兩種制約程序中都會減抑禁錮壓力源建立場地制約偏好行為的效果。在「倒序制約」方式中，在「實驗動物接受完30分鐘壓力源操弄後被置入制約箱之前」才給予多巴胺拮抗劑，也會破壞後續的配對制約形成。在中樞內側前額葉皮質部分，在「同時制約」或是「倒序制約」兩種制約程序中，二丁卡因在壓力源與環境刺激配對「之前」給予才會抑制禁錮壓力源建立場地制約偏好行為的效果。在壓力源與環境刺激配對「之後」才抑制該處神經活動則不影響壓力源建立制約行為的效果。中樞內側前額葉皮質施予多巴胺D1或是D2專屬受器拮抗劑，也得到前述相同實驗結果。 本研究的實驗結果證明單次禁錮壓力源確實可以建立場地制約，為另類的古典制約行為。壓力源的操弄可引發多巴胺釋放量增加，及內側前額葉皮質處的多巴胺確實參與了此禁錮壓力源引發場地制約偏好行為。總結本研究結果顯示內側前額葉皮質處多巴胺在壓力下會對制約行為學習造成影響，並冀望此結果可以擴展對於內側前額葉皮質功能失能與心智疾患間關係的瞭解。在演化上，壓力對於人類或是其他族群的生存有其必要性。動物對於其環境中的危險或是威脅事件必須進行行為學習或因應，才能避免生命的損失。 / To investigate the role of dopamine in stressor involved in classical conditioning, the present study used a dopamine-related task, conditioned place preference (CPP), as behavioral measurement. The mild restraint stressor was used and presumed to serve as the unconditioned stimulus to be paired with the contextual conditioned stimulus. The medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) was hypothesized to be involved in this type of stressor induced place conditioning. Experiment 1 examined the effects of restraint stressor on physiological, emotional or locomotor tests. Experiment 2 investigated the involvement of dopamine in the stressor induced CPP, which conditioning procedures were manipulated by either simultaneous or backward form. The selective dopamine receptor antagonists were systemically administered in different time points during the conditioning procedures. Experiment 3 took lidocaine, a local anesthetic, to induce temporal deactivation of the mPFC. Lidocaine was infused in the mPFC at various time points, in either simultaneous or backward conditioning, to evaluate the involvement of the mPFC in stressor induced place conditioning. To further investigate the effects of dopamine receptors in the mPFC in the present type of CPP, the selective dopamine receptor antagonists were locally infused into the mPFC in simulutaneous conditioning procedure in Experiment 4. The results showed that the manipulation of acute 30 min. restraint stressor increased the corticosterone, anxiety, but reduced the locomotor activities in rats. Consitent with previous work, this acute restraint stressor treatment given in either simultaneous or backward conditioning form significantly induced CPP. Systemic injection of dopamine D1 or D2 receptor antagonist given “before” or “after” the manipulation of restraint stressor, in either simultaneous or backward conditioning, attenuated the formation of stressor induced CPP. When these drugs were infused “right after the stressor manipulation and before the commencement of place conditioning” in the backward conditioning, the induction of CPP was also impaired. The attenuation of stressor formed place conditioning was showed when lidocaine was infused in the mPFC “before”, but not “after” the manipulation of restraint stressor. Such an attenuation effect was also seen when the selective D1 or D2 dopamine antagonist was infused in the mPFC. The present study showed restraint stressor induced place conditioning as a novel type of classical conditioning. Consistent with the evidence showing that the manipulation of this stressor increases the release of dopamine, this study further verifed that the dopamine in the mPFC is involved in this restraint stressor induced CPP.

国立情報学研究所で電子化したコンテンツを使用している。

Kyoto University (京都大学) / 0048 / 新制・課程博士 / 博士(工学) / 甲第15662号 / 工博第3320号 / 新制||工||1501(附属図書館) / 28199 / 京都大学大学院工学研究科建築学専攻 / (主査)教授 鉾井 修一, 教授 髙橋 大弐, 教授 原田 和典 / 学位規則第4条第1項該当

京都大学 / 0048 / 新制・課程博士 / 博士(人間・環境学) / 甲第22858号 / 人博第966号 / 新制||人||229(附属図書館) / 2020||人博||966(吉田南総合図書館) / 京都大学大学院人間・環境学研究科共生文明学専攻 / (主査)教授 須田 千里, 教授 佐野 宏, 准教授 長谷川 千尋 / 学位規則第4条第1項該当 / Doctor of Human and Environmental Studies / Kyoto University / DGAM

本研究旨在探討社會科學各學科期刊自我引用之情形。根據學者專家意見所做的社會科學範圍比較以及SSCI資料庫中對於社會科學類期刊收錄範圍所做的分類，共同篩選本研究的核心學科期刊，包括：人類學（51種）、商業學（101種）、經濟學（173種）、教育學（124種）、歷史學（54種）、資訊科學與圖書館學（53種）、法律學（99種）、管理學（73種）、政治學（83種）、心理學（423種）、社會工作與社會學（146種）等十一類學科。 採用Thomson Scientific公司所製作之2005年版SSCI的JCR資料庫社會科學學科期刊之引用數據，包括：刊載文章篇數、被引用次數、影響因素、即時引用指數、引用半衰期、被引用半衰期、同時法自我引用率及歷時法自我引用率等八項數據之各學科基本特性介紹，並利用皮爾森相關係數、費雪爾Z轉換、獨立樣本T檢定等統計方法進行分析。 研究結果歸納如下。： 一、社會科學各學科期刊的基本特性分析 1.社會科學期刊出刊頻率以季刊為主，其次為雙月刊，以經濟學的年出刊次數最多樣化，政治學的年出刊次數分佈最廣泛。 2.社會科學學科期刊的年刊載文章篇數，主要分佈在20~29篇，其次是30~39篇。 3.社會科學學科期刊的被引用次數，主要集中在100~199次，其次為分佈在200~299次。 4.期刊影響因素主要集中在0.001~0.999，幾近90%的社會科學期刊影響因素都未達2。 5.即時引用指數以分佈在0.001~0.099之間的居多，即時引用指數大於0.5以上的學科，以法律學最高，其次為心理學。 6.社會科學期刊十一類學科引用的參考文獻，以大於10年以上的資料為大多數，除了資訊科學與圖書館學(5至5.9年)和(法律學7至7.9年) 7.社會科學十一種學科期刊的被引用半衰期，主要是分佈在大於等於10年以上，僅有資訊科學與圖書館學(6年至6.9年)和政治學(5年至5.9年)。 8.十一種社會科學學科期刊的同時法自我引用率分佈，主要集中於1%至9.99%，佔社會科學學科期刊的77.75%。 9.十一種社會科學學科期刊的歷時法自我引用率分佈，主要集中於1%至9.99%(佔40.22%)。其次分佈在10%至19.99%(佔32.54%)。 顯示社會科學期刊在同時法自我引用率比歷時法自我引用率之分佈情形來得相似。 二、社會科學各學科期刊自我引用率與其他引用數據的相關性分析 同時法自我引用率與被引用次數、影響因素；歷時法自我引用率與影響因素為最相關的引用數據，而自我引用率與引用半衰期之相關性極小；歷時法自我引用率與即時引用指數則未有學科達到顯著差異。 三、社會科學各學科期刊自我引用率與其他引用數據的相關性差異分析 十三組引用數據相關係數差異性檢定之中，達到顯著水準的為： 1.同時法自我引用率和刊載文章篇數、被引用次數、影響因素、即時引用指數； 2.歷時法自我引用率和被引用半衰期； 3.同時法自我引用率和歷時法自我引用率等六組引用數據。 四、社會科學各學科期刊引用數據之平均數差異性分析 1.平均數最具差異的引用數據，以引用半衰期為最，其次是影響因素、被引用次數。 2.而以學科來看的話，平均數最具有差異的為歷史學，其次為心理學。 / The purpose of this study is to explore the self-citation researches of western social sciences journals. According to the experts and scholars opinions, and from the classification of social sciences journals registered in SSCI database knowing that the disciplines which including anthropology (51records), business (101records), economics (173records), education (124records), history (54records), information science and library science (53records), law(99records), management (73records), politics (83records), psychology (423records), sociology and social work (146 records) etc. This study adopts the citation data of Journal Citation Reports (JCR) on 2005. The citation data include articles, total cites, impact factor, immediacy index, citing half-life, cited half-life, synchronous self-citation rate, and diachronous self-citation rate. This research analyzes the journals'' basic characteristics and the characteristics of self-citation data on 2005 In this study, first, the correlation between each pair of citation data on the Pearson correlation tests. Second, the Fisher’s Z-Transform examination is used to examine the correlation coefficient variation of citation data. Third, the study focuses on independent-samples T test is used to ascertain whether there were equality and mean difference between the citation data in social sciences. The results of this study revealed: 1. The distributions of basic data of each disciplines journals and the characteristic of the citation data. (1)Most social sciences journals are quarterly, followed by bimonthly. The economics journals are the most diverse in issued numbers each year, and politics journals are the most extensive of the distribution scope each year. (2)The most numbers of published articles of each journal are 20-29 articles, followed by 30-39 articles. (3) The most numbers of citation frequency of each journal are 100-199 times, followed by 200-299 times. (4)The impact factor is between 0.001 and 0.999 mostly. Among the journals which have the impact factor bigger than 2. (5)The immediacy index is concentrated mostly in 0.001~0.099. However, the immediacy index bigger than 0.5 are law and psychology journals mostly. (6)The mostly Citing half-life is focused on 10 to more than 10 year. Except for information science and library science journals concentrate in 5 years to 5.9 years, the law journals are focused on 7 to 7.9 years. (7)In addition to the information science and library science and politics journals are in cited half-life, the rest journals are not aged easily and have the longer life cycle. (8) The most numbers of synchronous self-citation rate of each journal are 1%-9.99%. (9) The most numbers of diachronous self-citation rate of each journal are 1%-9.99%, followed by 10%-19.99%. The synchronous self-citation rate for each discipline journals are similar; whereas diachronous self-citation rate are different 2. The correlation between self-citation rate and other citation data in journals of social sciences. The highest correlations of journals citation data are between the synchronous self-citation rate and total cites, impact factor, and between diachronous self-citation rate and impact factor; but the correlation between self-citation rate and citing half-life is the minimum. However, there is no significant difference between diachronous self-citation rate and immediacy index. 3.The correlation coefficient variation of self-citation rate and other citation data in journals of social sciences. There are six groups citation data in each discipline have significant difference in correlation coefficient included： (1)Synchronous self-citation rate and published articles, total cites, impact factor and immediacy index. (2) Diachronous self-citation rate and cited half-life. (3) Synchronous self-citation rate and Diachronous self-citation rate. 4.The analysis of equality and mean difference between the citation data in social sciences disciplines journals. (1)Citing half-life has the most significant differences. The second is impact factor. The third is total cites. (2)The difference between history and other disciplines is the highest, psychology come next.

本研究採用同時法與歷時法二種文獻老化研究方法，進行資訊檢索領域下系統研究及使用者研究二種主題文獻之老化研究，主要研究重點有二，一是資訊檢索領域下，系統研究及使用者研究二種不同主題文獻老化現象之差異性；二是同一主題文獻下，同時法與歷時法二種不同老化研究方法之文獻衰退情形是否一致。 同時法研究是針對現時某一特定文獻之引用參考文獻進行分析，並測得其引用年齡中數。本研究自LISA資料庫取得2006年資訊檢索領域下系統研究及使用者研究二種主題之相關文獻，作為同時法研究樣本，並利用T檢定檢測系統研究及使用者研究二種主題文獻老化現象之差異。在同時法研究結果方面，系統研究及使用者研究二種主題文獻之引用年齡中數分別為7.25歲與7.98歲，系統研究主題文獻同時法老化速度快於使用者研究主題文獻，但差異不大，T檢定結果亦顯示同時法系統研究及使用者研究二種主題文獻之老化速度無顯著差異。 歷時法研究是分析過去某特定期間所發表之文獻，其逐年被引用情形，並計算其被引用半衰期。本研究利用LISA資料庫取得1996年資訊檢索領域下系統研究及使用者研究二種主題之相關文獻，作為歷時法研究樣本，並利用WOS資料庫，取得其自1996年至2006年間逐年被引用情形。在歷時法研究結果方面，系統研究及使用者研究二種主題文獻之被引用半衰期分別為5.12歲與4.99歲，系統研究主題文獻之歷時法老化速度較使用者研究主題文獻稍慢，二者差異不大，T檢定結果亦顯示歷時法系統研究及使用者研究二種主題文獻之老化速度無顯著差異。 在同時法與歷時法二種研究方法比較部份，就文獻老化速度而言，同時法之引用參考文獻數量於高峰期後，呈現顯著文獻衰退現象；而歷時法達到被引用次數最高峰後，則未呈現明顯文獻衰退現象，可知同時法文獻老化速度較歷時法文獻老化速度快。在柯史（K-S）檢測方面，檢測結果發現，不論系統研究主題文獻或使用者研究主題文獻，同時法與歷時法之文獻老化現象皆不一致。 因此，本研究重要研究結論有二：一是資訊檢索領域下，不會因主題不同而有顯著差異；二是資訊檢索領域下，同時法所測得之文獻老化現象與歷時法所測得之文獻老化現象不一致。 / This obsolescence study uses two kinds of aging research methods - synchronous approach and diachrinous approach. Analyze two subjects of systems-centered and users-centered in the information retrieval field. The main emphasis of the research is two. First, under information retrieval field, the differences between systems-centered and user-centered in obsolescence study. Second, the difference between synchronous approach and diachrinous approach’s aging phenomenon in the same subject. Synchronous approach is targeted at the present of a particular literature references and calculated median citation age. This study acquired the information retrieval field of systems-centered and user-centered’s sample in 2006 from LISA database, and tested the difference between systems-centered and user-centered literature aging with using t-test. The result of synchronous approach, median citation age of systems-centered literature is 7.25 years and median citation age of user-centered literature is 7.98 years. So systems-centered literature aging is faster than user-centered literature. But the difference is small. T test results also revealed that difference between systems-centered and user-centered of literature aging has not significantly. Diachrinous approach was to analyze a particular during the past published literature and observed the cited times each year, and finally calculated its half-life. This study acquired the information retrieval field of systems-centered and user-centered’s sample in 1996 from LISA database, and acquired the cited times each year during 1996 to 2006 from WOS database.The result of diachrinous approach, cited half-life of system-centered literatures is 5.12 and cited half-life of user-centered literatures is 4.99 years. So user-centered literature aging was faster than system-centered literatures. But the difference was small. T test results also revealed that difference between the system-centered and user-centered of literature aging has not significantly Synchronous approach and diachrinous approach methods of comparison. By the literature on the aging speed, cited reference numbers of synchronous approach reached peak period, and the literature curve showed significant recession; cited times of diachrinous approach reached a peak, and literature curve were not significantly recession. It revealed that aging speed of synchronous approach was faster than aging speed of diachrinous approach. In the K-S test, the results showed that synchronous approach and diachrinous approach were inconsistent, whether systems-centered literatures or users-centered literatures. Therefore, the important conclusion of this study are two : First, in the information retrieval field, even different subject there will be no significant differences on literature aging phenomenon; Second, under the information retrieval field, synchronous approach and diachrinous approach which measured the aging phenomenon of literature are inconsistent.

第10回名古屋大学タンデトロン加速器質量分析計シンポジウム(平成9 (1997)年度)報告 ｢最新型タンデトロン加速器質量分析計(加速器年代測定システム)による高精度･高分解能14C年代測定の利用分野･方法の開拓(II)｣