知觉负载与工作记忆负载对干扰效应的不同影响
|
摘要
选择性注意产生的机制有两种：被动的知觉选择机制和积极的认知控制。针对知觉负载与工作记忆负载对注意选择影响的不同作用关系,以及工作记忆负载和知觉负载对面孔干扰刺激的干扰效应的影响,本研究主要解决以下问题：(1)证明影响选择性注意的两大因素——知觉负载和工作记忆负载对同一stroop任务干扰效应的不同作用取决于知觉负载的高低,以及工作记忆负载的类型与干扰任务目标、干扰刺激加工的机制是否重叠。(2)证明工作记忆负载是否与知觉负载一样,无法改变面孔干扰刺激的注意选择；面孔工作记忆负载能否调节面孔干扰刺激的干扰效应?
本研究设计了两个实验。实验一采用知觉负载和任务类型两因素的被试内设计,让18名被试完成6个小实验,其中包括2个基线任务(低知觉负载和高知觉负载的“字——箭头”stroop任务)和4个两单任务结合的双任务(两基线任务分别与言语工作记忆任务、空间工作记忆任务结合)。低知觉负载的“字——箭头”stroop任务要求被试对图片中间的一个中文的“左”或“右”字进行左右字义判断,而忽略同时出现在字的上方和下方的箭头左右朝向。高知觉负载的“字——箭头”stroop任务与低知觉负载基线任务唯一不同的是图片中间是四个字,其中一个是“左”或“右”字。实验一的结果发现,当工作记忆负载的类型与当前干扰任务目标反应的资源类型相同时,干扰效应增大；而当工作记忆负载的类型与当前干扰任务中干扰刺激加工的资源类型相同时,干扰效应减少或消失(甚至不一致减去一致的反应时的差为负值)。
实验二亦设置基线任务和双任务,通过改变当前工作记忆负载的类型来观测“字——箭头”stroop任务的干扰效应。让18名被试完成3个小实验(一个“人名——面孔”stroop任务作为基线任务,另两个是“字——箭头”stroop任务分别与言语工作记忆任务、面孔工作记忆任务结合的双任务)。“字——箭头”stroop任务要求被试只判断人名是指政治家或明星,而忽略人名旁边的政治家或明星的面孔(人名和面孔有可能匹配,有可能属于不同的类别,分别构成一致和不一致情况)。实验二结果表明,言语工作记忆负载无法影响“字——箭头”stroop任务的干扰效应,而面孔工作记忆负载能够减少面孔干扰刺激的干扰效应,这可能是由于面孔工作记忆负载与面孔干扰刺激是相同的资源类型,资源共享而削弱了面孔干扰刺激的注意加工。
There are two kinds of mechanisms of selective attention:the passive perceptual selection mechanism and the active cognitive control. With regard to the different influence of perceptual load(PL) and working memory load(WML) on attention selection,and the impact of PL and WML on interference effects of face distractor, this study intends to solve these following questions:(1)to prove that if the two factor of selective attention——PL and WML having different influence on the interference effects of the same stroop task relies on the level of perceptual load, or WML overlaping with mechanisms involved in target or distractor processing.(2)to prove that WML can't change the attention selecting of face distractor which is the same as PL; to prove that whether face WML can adjust the interference effects of face distractor?
This research designs two experiments. Exp. One uses within-subjects design which includes PL and task type as two factors. Eighteen subjects must do 6 small experiments, which include 2 baseline tasks (the low PL "word——arrow" stroop task and the high PL "word——arrow" stroop task) and 4 double-tasks of two single-task combination (each of the 2 baseline tasks combines with verbal WM task and the spatial WM task). The low PL "word——arrow" stroop task needs subjects to judge the meaning of a central word which is "left" or "right" in Chinese on the picture, to ignore upward and downward arrows which orient left or right meanwhile. Different with the low PL "word——arrow" stroop task, the high one has four words in the central of the picture, among which there is a "left" or "right" word. The results of Exp. One find that, interference effects increase when the type of WML overlaps with the type of resource required for the interference task; In striking contrast, interference effects decrease, or disappear (even the RT of incongruence minus the RT of congruence is negative) when the type of WML overlaps with distractor processing.
Exp. Two designs baseline task and double-task as well. It observes the interference effects of the "name——face" stroop task through changing the current type of WML. Let eighteen subjects finish 3 small experiments (one is "name——face" stroop task which is baseline task, the another two are two double-tasks which are the combination of "name——face" stroop task and verbal WM task, and the combination of "name——face" stroop task and face WM task). The "name——face" stroop task needs subjects to indicate whether a central name is a politician's or a star's name, while ignoring a politician's or a star's face next to the name (The distractor could be either the face of the person named, or the face of a person from the opposite category, both of which make up congruence and incongruence conditions). The results of Exp. Two indicate that, verbal WML can't influence the interference effects of the "name——face" stroop task, nevertheless, face WML can decreases the interference effects of face distractor, this may due to the same type of resource of face WML and face distractor. Sharing resource weakens the attention processing of face distractor.
本研究设计了两个实验。实验一采用知觉负载和任务类型两因素的被试内设计,让18名被试完成6个小实验,其中包括2个基线任务(低知觉负载和高知觉负载的“字——箭头”stroop任务)和4个两单任务结合的双任务(两基线任务分别与言语工作记忆任务、空间工作记忆任务结合)。低知觉负载的“字——箭头”stroop任务要求被试对图片中间的一个中文的“左”或“右”字进行左右字义判断,而忽略同时出现在字的上方和下方的箭头左右朝向。高知觉负载的“字——箭头”stroop任务与低知觉负载基线任务唯一不同的是图片中间是四个字,其中一个是“左”或“右”字。实验一的结果发现,当工作记忆负载的类型与当前干扰任务目标反应的资源类型相同时,干扰效应增大；而当工作记忆负载的类型与当前干扰任务中干扰刺激加工的资源类型相同时,干扰效应减少或消失(甚至不一致减去一致的反应时的差为负值)。
实验二亦设置基线任务和双任务,通过改变当前工作记忆负载的类型来观测“字——箭头”stroop任务的干扰效应。让18名被试完成3个小实验(一个“人名——面孔”stroop任务作为基线任务,另两个是“字——箭头”stroop任务分别与言语工作记忆任务、面孔工作记忆任务结合的双任务)。“字——箭头”stroop任务要求被试只判断人名是指政治家或明星,而忽略人名旁边的政治家或明星的面孔(人名和面孔有可能匹配,有可能属于不同的类别,分别构成一致和不一致情况)。实验二结果表明,言语工作记忆负载无法影响“字——箭头”stroop任务的干扰效应,而面孔工作记忆负载能够减少面孔干扰刺激的干扰效应,这可能是由于面孔工作记忆负载与面孔干扰刺激是相同的资源类型,资源共享而削弱了面孔干扰刺激的注意加工。
There are two kinds of mechanisms of selective attention:the passive perceptual selection mechanism and the active cognitive control. With regard to the different influence of perceptual load(PL) and working memory load(WML) on attention selection,and the impact of PL and WML on interference effects of face distractor, this study intends to solve these following questions:(1)to prove that if the two factor of selective attention——PL and WML having different influence on the interference effects of the same stroop task relies on the level of perceptual load, or WML overlaping with mechanisms involved in target or distractor processing.(2)to prove that WML can't change the attention selecting of face distractor which is the same as PL; to prove that whether face WML can adjust the interference effects of face distractor?
This research designs two experiments. Exp. One uses within-subjects design which includes PL and task type as two factors. Eighteen subjects must do 6 small experiments, which include 2 baseline tasks (the low PL "word——arrow" stroop task and the high PL "word——arrow" stroop task) and 4 double-tasks of two single-task combination (each of the 2 baseline tasks combines with verbal WM task and the spatial WM task). The low PL "word——arrow" stroop task needs subjects to judge the meaning of a central word which is "left" or "right" in Chinese on the picture, to ignore upward and downward arrows which orient left or right meanwhile. Different with the low PL "word——arrow" stroop task, the high one has four words in the central of the picture, among which there is a "left" or "right" word. The results of Exp. One find that, interference effects increase when the type of WML overlaps with the type of resource required for the interference task; In striking contrast, interference effects decrease, or disappear (even the RT of incongruence minus the RT of congruence is negative) when the type of WML overlaps with distractor processing.
Exp. Two designs baseline task and double-task as well. It observes the interference effects of the "name——face" stroop task through changing the current type of WML. Let eighteen subjects finish 3 small experiments (one is "name——face" stroop task which is baseline task, the another two are two double-tasks which are the combination of "name——face" stroop task and verbal WM task, and the combination of "name——face" stroop task and face WM task). The "name——face" stroop task needs subjects to indicate whether a central name is a politician's or a star's name, while ignoring a politician's or a star's face next to the name (The distractor could be either the face of the person named, or the face of a person from the opposite category, both of which make up congruence and incongruence conditions). The results of Exp. Two indicate that, verbal WML can't influence the interference effects of the "name——face" stroop task, nevertheless, face WML can decreases the interference effects of face distractor, this may due to the same type of resource of face WML and face distractor. Sharing resource weakens the attention processing of face distractor.
引文
[1]Kahneman D. Attention and Effect. Englewood cliffs, New Jersey:Prentice Hall, Inc,1973.
[2]Broadbent D E. Perception and Communication. London:Pergamon Press,1958.
[3]Lavie N. Perceptual Load as a Necessary Condition for Selective Attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology:Human Perception and Performance,1995,21(3):451-468.
[4]Treisman A M. Contextual Cues in Selective Listening. Quarterly journal of Experimental Psychology,1960,12:242-248.
[5]Treisman A M, Geffen G Selective Attention:Perception and Response? Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,1967,19:1～18.
[6]Deutch J A, Deutch D. Attention:Some Theoretical Considerations. Psychological Review,1963, 70:80～90.
[7]Deutch J A, Deutch D. Comments on "Selective Attention:Perception or Response?". The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,1967,19:36～363.
[8]Lavie N. Distracted and Confused? Selective Attention Under Load. Trends in Cognitive Sciences,2005,9(2):75～82.
[9]Eriksen B A, Eriksen C W. Effects of Noise Letters upon the Identification of a Target Letter in a Nonsearch Task. Perception & Psychophysics,1974,16:143～149.
[10]Jonides J, Yantis S. Uniqueness of Abrupt Visual Onset in Capturing Attention. Perception & Psychophysics,1988,43:346～354.
[11]Theeuwes J. Perceptual Selectivity for Color and Form. Perception & Psychophysics,1992,51: 599～606.
[12]Theeuwes J. Stimulus-Driven Capture and Attentional Set-Selective Search for Color and Visual Abrupt Onsets. Journal of Experimental Psychology:Human Perception and Performance, 1994,20:799～806.
[13]Treisman A M, Gelade G.A Feature-integration Theory of Attention. Cognitive Psychology, 1980,12:97-136.
[14]Treisman A M, Schmidt H. Illusory Conjunctions in the Perception of Objects. Cognitive Psychology,1982,14:107-141.
[15]Treisman A M, Sato S. Conjunction Search Revisited. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance,1990,16:459～478.
[16]Barnhardt J, Ritter W, Gomes H.Perceptual Load Affects Spatial and Nonspatial Visual Selection Process:An Event-related Brain Potential Study. Neuropsychologia,2008,46:2071～ 2078.
[17]Rees G, Frith C D, Lavie N. Modulating Irrelevant Motion Perception by Varying Attentional Load in an Unrelated Task. Science,1997,278(28):1616-1619.
[18]Yi D J, Woodman G F, Widders D, et al. Neural Fate of Ignored Stimuli:Dissociable Effects of Perceptual and Working Memory Load. Nature Neuroscience,2004,7(9):992-996.
[19]Forster S & Lavie N. High Perceptual Load Makes Everybody Equal-Eliminating Individual Differences in Distractibility With Load. Psychological science,2007,18:377-381.
[20]Lavie N, Cox S. On the Efficiency of Visual Selective Attention:Efficient Visual Search Leads to Inefficient Distractor Rejection. Psychological Science,1997,8(5):395～398.
[21]de Fockert J W, Rees G, Frith C D, et al. The Role of Working Memory in Visual Selective Attention. Science,2001,291(2):1803～1806.
[22]Woodman, G.F., Vogel, E. K.& Luck, S. J. Visual Search Remains Efficient When Visual Working Memory is Full. Psychological Science,2001,12:219～224.
[23]Kim S Y, Kim M S, Chun M M. Concurrent Working Memory Load Can Reduce Distraction. PNAS,2005,102(45):16524-16529.
[24]Lavie N, Hirst A, De Fockert J W, et al. Load Theory of Selective Attention and Cognitive Control. Journal of Experimental Psychology:General,2004,133(3):339～354.
[25]Lavie N, Ro T, Russell C. The Role of Perceptual Load in Processing Distractor Faces. Psychological Science,2003,14(5):510～515.
[26]Eimer, M. The Face-specific N170 Component reflects late stages in the structural encoding of faces. Neuroreport,2000,11(10):2319～2324.
[27]Schweinberger S R, Huddy V, Burton A M. N250r:A Face-selective Brain Response to Stimulus Repetitions. Neuroreport,2004,15(9):1501～1505.
[28]van Berkum J J A, Hagoort P, Brown C M. Semantic Integration in Sentences and Discourse: Evidence from the N400. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience,1999,11(6):657～671.
[29]Neumann M F, Schweinberger S R. N250r and N400 ERP Correlates of Immediate Famous Face Repetition Are Independent of Perceptual Load. Brain Research,2008,1239:181～190.
[30]Bukach C M, Gauthier I, Tarr M J. Beyond faces and modularity:the power of an expertise framework. TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences,2006,10(4):159～166.
[31]Ro T, Friggel A, Lavie N. Musical expertise modulates the effects of visual perceptual load. Attention, Perception,& Psychophysics,2009,71,671～674.
[32]Ruz M, Worden M S,Tudela P, et al. Inattentional Amnesia to Words in a High Attentional Load Task. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience,2005,17(5):768～776.
[2]Broadbent D E. Perception and Communication. London:Pergamon Press,1958.
[3]Lavie N. Perceptual Load as a Necessary Condition for Selective Attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology:Human Perception and Performance,1995,21(3):451-468.
[4]Treisman A M. Contextual Cues in Selective Listening. Quarterly journal of Experimental Psychology,1960,12:242-248.
[5]Treisman A M, Geffen G Selective Attention:Perception and Response? Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,1967,19:1～18.
[6]Deutch J A, Deutch D. Attention:Some Theoretical Considerations. Psychological Review,1963, 70:80～90.
[7]Deutch J A, Deutch D. Comments on "Selective Attention:Perception or Response?". The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,1967,19:36～363.
[8]Lavie N. Distracted and Confused? Selective Attention Under Load. Trends in Cognitive Sciences,2005,9(2):75～82.
[9]Eriksen B A, Eriksen C W. Effects of Noise Letters upon the Identification of a Target Letter in a Nonsearch Task. Perception & Psychophysics,1974,16:143～149.
[10]Jonides J, Yantis S. Uniqueness of Abrupt Visual Onset in Capturing Attention. Perception & Psychophysics,1988,43:346～354.
[11]Theeuwes J. Perceptual Selectivity for Color and Form. Perception & Psychophysics,1992,51: 599～606.
[12]Theeuwes J. Stimulus-Driven Capture and Attentional Set-Selective Search for Color and Visual Abrupt Onsets. Journal of Experimental Psychology:Human Perception and Performance, 1994,20:799～806.
[13]Treisman A M, Gelade G.A Feature-integration Theory of Attention. Cognitive Psychology, 1980,12:97-136.
[14]Treisman A M, Schmidt H. Illusory Conjunctions in the Perception of Objects. Cognitive Psychology,1982,14:107-141.
[15]Treisman A M, Sato S. Conjunction Search Revisited. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance,1990,16:459～478.
[16]Barnhardt J, Ritter W, Gomes H.Perceptual Load Affects Spatial and Nonspatial Visual Selection Process:An Event-related Brain Potential Study. Neuropsychologia,2008,46:2071～ 2078.
[17]Rees G, Frith C D, Lavie N. Modulating Irrelevant Motion Perception by Varying Attentional Load in an Unrelated Task. Science,1997,278(28):1616-1619.
[18]Yi D J, Woodman G F, Widders D, et al. Neural Fate of Ignored Stimuli:Dissociable Effects of Perceptual and Working Memory Load. Nature Neuroscience,2004,7(9):992-996.
[19]Forster S & Lavie N. High Perceptual Load Makes Everybody Equal-Eliminating Individual Differences in Distractibility With Load. Psychological science,2007,18:377-381.
[20]Lavie N, Cox S. On the Efficiency of Visual Selective Attention:Efficient Visual Search Leads to Inefficient Distractor Rejection. Psychological Science,1997,8(5):395～398.
[21]de Fockert J W, Rees G, Frith C D, et al. The Role of Working Memory in Visual Selective Attention. Science,2001,291(2):1803～1806.
[22]Woodman, G.F., Vogel, E. K.& Luck, S. J. Visual Search Remains Efficient When Visual Working Memory is Full. Psychological Science,2001,12:219～224.
[23]Kim S Y, Kim M S, Chun M M. Concurrent Working Memory Load Can Reduce Distraction. PNAS,2005,102(45):16524-16529.
[24]Lavie N, Hirst A, De Fockert J W, et al. Load Theory of Selective Attention and Cognitive Control. Journal of Experimental Psychology:General,2004,133(3):339～354.
[25]Lavie N, Ro T, Russell C. The Role of Perceptual Load in Processing Distractor Faces. Psychological Science,2003,14(5):510～515.
[26]Eimer, M. The Face-specific N170 Component reflects late stages in the structural encoding of faces. Neuroreport,2000,11(10):2319～2324.
[27]Schweinberger S R, Huddy V, Burton A M. N250r:A Face-selective Brain Response to Stimulus Repetitions. Neuroreport,2004,15(9):1501～1505.
[28]van Berkum J J A, Hagoort P, Brown C M. Semantic Integration in Sentences and Discourse: Evidence from the N400. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience,1999,11(6):657～671.
[29]Neumann M F, Schweinberger S R. N250r and N400 ERP Correlates of Immediate Famous Face Repetition Are Independent of Perceptual Load. Brain Research,2008,1239:181～190.
[30]Bukach C M, Gauthier I, Tarr M J. Beyond faces and modularity:the power of an expertise framework. TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences,2006,10(4):159～166.
[31]Ro T, Friggel A, Lavie N. Musical expertise modulates the effects of visual perceptual load. Attention, Perception,& Psychophysics,2009,71,671～674.
[32]Ruz M, Worden M S,Tudela P, et al. Inattentional Amnesia to Words in a High Attentional Load Task. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience,2005,17(5):768～776.