元认知信念影响事件性前瞻记忆注意资源分配策略
详细信息 查看官网全文
- 英文论文题名：Metacognitive beliefs influence attention allocation strategies of even-based prospective memory
- 论文作者：王梓宇 ; 周灿灿 ; 游旭群
- 年：2015
- 作者机构：陕西师范大学心理学院;陕西师范大学;
- 论文关键词：事件性前瞻记忆 ; 元认知 ; 注意资源分配策略 ; 前瞻记忆干扰效应
- 英文论文关键词：even-based prospective memory ; metacognition ; attention allocation strategy ; prospective interference effect
- 会议召开时间：2015-10-16
- 会议录名称：第十八届全国心理学学术会议摘要集——心理学与社会发展
- 英文会议录名称：Proceedings of the 18th National Academic Congress of Psychology
- 语种：中文
- 分类号：B842.3
- 学会代码：ZGXG
- 会议名称：第十八届全国心理学学术会议
- 会议地点：中国天津
- 主办单位：中国心理学会
- 学会名称：中国心理学会
- 页数：3
- 文件大小：800k
- 原文格式：D
- 会议级别：全国
摘要
事件性前瞻记忆(even-based prospective memory,EBPM)指当某一特定事件出现时记得执行意向行为。为成功执行意向,个体需根据背景任务和前瞻记忆任务需求建立注意资源分配策略。当前研究通过操纵前瞻记忆任务需求,验证元认知信念会影响注意资源分配策略的建立,并进一步探讨经验不一致性对注意资源分配策略的调整作用。研究包含两个实验,均将被试分为一致组、不一致组和控制组。采用双任务实验范式,其中背景任务为词类判断任务(不包括动物类),PM任务为判断该词是否属动物类,以熟悉动物词代表低PM任务需求,非熟悉动物词代表高PM任务需求。通过PM指导语和练习实验操纵被试对PM任务需求的元认知信念(高、低、无PM指导)。随后,正式实验过程中,实验1中向被试呈现低任务需求PM线索,实验2中向被试呈现高任务需求PM线索。实验因变量为背景任务和PM任务的反应时和正确率。研究结果发现:(1)实验1中,PM组背景任务反应时显著高于控制组;在第一个PM线索出现前,一致组比不一致组背景任务反应时短;在第一个PM线索出现后,不一致组中反应正确被试的背景任务反应时显著降低,且与一致组不再有显著差异。(2)实验1中,一致组与不一致组背景任务正确率和PM正确率无显著差异。(3)实验2中,PM组背景任务反应时显著高于控制组;在第一个PM线索出现前,一致组比不一致组背景任务反应时长;在第一个PM线索出现后,不一致组中反应正确被试的背景任务反应时明显增加,且与一致组不再有显著差异;(4)实验2中,不一致组前瞻记忆正确率显著低于一致组。上述结果表明:(1)维持前瞻意向对背景任务产生干扰效应;(2)元认知信念影响事件性前瞻记忆注意资源分配策略的建立;(3)事件性前瞻记忆注意资源分配策略具有可调整性。
Even-based prospective memory( EBPM) refers to the ability to remember performing an intended action at the occurrence of a target cue. Performing a PM task successfully needs individuals to establish an attention allocation strategy which is decided by the PM task demands and the ongoing task demands. The attention allocation strategies are not just based on the subject task demands but also rely on the metacognitive beliefs about the cognitive demands of the entire task set and their ability to perform the upcoming tasks. Therefore, current researches are conducted to investigate whether metacognitive beliefs of PM task demands will impact the attention allocation strategies establishing. Furthermore, we also investigate whether task experience bias will lead to the attention allocation strategies' calibration. In experiment 1, we divided the participants into three groups(consistent group, inconsistent group and control group), and asked them to judge whether the word on the left screen belonged to the category on the right screen(if Yes, press the button "S"; if No, press the button "K"). Meanwhile, if the word was animal word, they needed to press the space bar to response. In the PM instruction and practice block, we presented different PM task demands words to different groups( familiar animal words which mean low PM task demands to consistent group and unfamiliar animal words which mean high PM task demands to inconsistent group), and in experiment blocks we presented familiar animal words to all groups. In experiment 2, we presented different PM task demands to different groups( familiar animal words which mean low PM task demands to inconsistent group and unfamiliar animal words which mean high PM task demands to consistent group), and in experiment blocks we presented unfamiliar animal words to all groups in experiment, others were the same as experiment 1. We found that(1) in experiment 1 and 2, there were significant difference between PM groups and non-PM group of the ongoing task RT, PM groups were higher than non-PM group;(2) in experiment 1, the consistent group ongoing task RT was shorter than inconsistent group before the first PM cue but then was significant reduced after the first PM cue;(3) In experiment 2, the consistent group ongoing task RT was longer than inconsistent group before the first PM cue but then was significant increased after the first PM cue;(4) in experiment 1, there were no significant difference between PM groups of the ongoing task accuracy and PM task accuracy, but there were significant difference between PM groups of PM task accuracy in experiment 2. The result suggests(a) PM intention maintenance will lead to prospective interference effect,(b) the metacognitive beliefs of PM task demands will impact the attention allocation strategies establishing and(c) task experience bias will lead to the attention allocation strategies' calibration.
Even-based prospective memory( EBPM) refers to the ability to remember performing an intended action at the occurrence of a target cue. Performing a PM task successfully needs individuals to establish an attention allocation strategy which is decided by the PM task demands and the ongoing task demands. The attention allocation strategies are not just based on the subject task demands but also rely on the metacognitive beliefs about the cognitive demands of the entire task set and their ability to perform the upcoming tasks. Therefore, current researches are conducted to investigate whether metacognitive beliefs of PM task demands will impact the attention allocation strategies establishing. Furthermore, we also investigate whether task experience bias will lead to the attention allocation strategies' calibration. In experiment 1, we divided the participants into three groups(consistent group, inconsistent group and control group), and asked them to judge whether the word on the left screen belonged to the category on the right screen(if Yes, press the button "S"; if No, press the button "K"). Meanwhile, if the word was animal word, they needed to press the space bar to response. In the PM instruction and practice block, we presented different PM task demands words to different groups( familiar animal words which mean low PM task demands to consistent group and unfamiliar animal words which mean high PM task demands to inconsistent group), and in experiment blocks we presented familiar animal words to all groups. In experiment 2, we presented different PM task demands to different groups( familiar animal words which mean low PM task demands to inconsistent group and unfamiliar animal words which mean high PM task demands to consistent group), and in experiment blocks we presented unfamiliar animal words to all groups in experiment, others were the same as experiment 1. We found that(1) in experiment 1 and 2, there were significant difference between PM groups and non-PM group of the ongoing task RT, PM groups were higher than non-PM group;(2) in experiment 1, the consistent group ongoing task RT was shorter than inconsistent group before the first PM cue but then was significant reduced after the first PM cue;(3) In experiment 2, the consistent group ongoing task RT was longer than inconsistent group before the first PM cue but then was significant increased after the first PM cue;(4) in experiment 1, there were no significant difference between PM groups of the ongoing task accuracy and PM task accuracy, but there were significant difference between PM groups of PM task accuracy in experiment 2. The result suggests(a) PM intention maintenance will lead to prospective interference effect,(b) the metacognitive beliefs of PM task demands will impact the attention allocation strategies establishing and(c) task experience bias will lead to the attention allocation strategies' calibration.
引文