加工焦点性和任务负荷对不同认知方式大学生前瞻记忆的影响

采用双任务范式,探讨了加工焦点性和进行中任务负荷对不同认知方式大学生前瞻记忆的影响。包括两个实验:实验一探讨进行中任务与前瞻记忆任务加工的焦点性和加工类型的一致性对不同认知方式大学生前瞻记忆的影响;实验二探讨进行中任务负荷对不同认知方式大学生在在焦点加工和非焦点加工条件下前瞻记忆的影响。结果显示:焦点加工条件下的前瞻记忆成绩高于非焦点加工,且不受进行中任务负荷的影响;不管进行中任务与前瞻记忆任务的加工类型是否一致,在进行中任务负荷较高且非焦点加工条件下,场独立大学生的前瞻记忆成绩高于场依存大学生。本研究结果支持多重加工理论。     

前瞻记忆意向后效应的加工机制:来自眼动的证据

基于重复前瞻记忆目标范式和视觉搜索范式，采用多种类型刺激呈现的眼动测量方式考察前瞻记忆意向后效应的加工机制。研究采用2（条件）×5（刺激类型）的混合实验设计，显著条件下前瞻记忆目标为红色，非显著条件下前瞻记忆目标和其他字母的颜色均为白色，背景为黑色。结果显示，显著和非显著条件下前瞻记忆完成阶段中对原前瞻记忆目标的反应时慢于控制条件，而且前瞻记忆目标在进行中任务目标之后的反应时慢于进行中任务目标之前的刺激类型。另外，非显著条件下，前瞻记忆目标在进行中任务目标之前和之后的眼动数据没有差异；显著条件下的注视点数量多于控制条件，前瞻记忆目标在进行中任务目标之后的注视点数量多于进行中任务目标之前的刺激类型。结果说明，前瞻记忆任务完成以后，在随后的阶段中遇到原前瞻记忆目标时被试会投入认知资源对其进行抑制，支持抑制加工。     

前瞻记忆的年老化效应:前瞻成分和回溯成分的调节作用

关注事件性前瞻记忆的年老化,采用基于双重任务的实验室研究范式,实验一控制线索与意向的关联性和线索的显著性操纵概念驱动加工和数据驱动加工过程,比较前瞻记忆的前瞻成分和回溯成分的年老化影响;实验二检验前瞻成分在前瞻记忆年老化中的作用。结果显示,线索与意向的关联性和线索与背景的区别性作为概念驱动加工和数据驱动加工的重要表现形式可以显著地促进老年人的前瞻记忆水平,前瞻记忆年老化主要存在于前瞻记忆的前瞻成分;前瞻成分较高的注意资源需求导致前瞻记忆的年龄差异主要受任务的认知需求水平所影响,当前瞻记忆是相对自动加工时,年龄差异小;当任务需要较多的控制加工时,年龄差异相对较大。本研究进一步揭示了导致前瞻记忆年龄差异的原因。     

目标显著性和任务重要性对数学学业不良生和学优生前瞻记忆和前瞻干扰效应的影响

有问卷调查表明,个体的学业成绩特别是数学成绩与前瞻记忆表现有一定的相关,学业不良生报告更多的前瞻记忆失败。也有实验研究显示,学业不良生在很多情况下前瞻记忆表现劣于学优生。但是,影响学业不良生前瞻记忆表现的因素却并不是很明确。本研究从目标显著性和任务重要性这两个可以着手于改善前瞻记忆的主要因素入手,考察其对数学学业不良生和学优生事件性前瞻记忆和前瞻干扰效应的影响,以期为提高学业不良生的前瞻记忆表现提供实证依据。 采用2学业成就（学业不良生、学优生）×2前瞻记忆任务重要性（强调重要、不强调）×2目标显著性（显著、不显著）混合实验设计,目标显著性为被试内变量,其他两个因素为被试间变量,在双任务实验范式（前瞻记忆任务镶嵌于进行中任务）中,考察三个因素对前瞻记忆正确率和反应时的影响。此外,被试还需完成基线条件,在基线条件下被试只有进行中任务,没有前瞻记忆任务,通过实验条件和基线条件的正确率和反应时差异,考察前瞻记忆任务对进行中任务的干扰效应,推测前瞻记忆的加工机制。结果表明,学业不良生在所有前瞻记忆任务表现均劣于学优生;目标显著性与前瞻记忆任务重要性对前瞻记忆正确率有显著的交互作用,强调任务重要性使目标不显著条件下的前瞻记忆正确率提高,对显著条件的前瞻记忆正确率没有影响。强调任务重要性使所有实验条件的前瞻记忆反应时下降,目标显著使所有实验条件的前瞻记忆正确率提高。所有实验条件进行中任务正确率低于基线条件,反应时也慢于基线条件,表明执行前瞻记忆任务对进行中任务产生了干扰,学业不良生和学优生在本实验条件下对前瞻记忆任务均采用监控的加工方式。结果说明,学业不良生前瞻记忆成绩较差,可以通过设置显著的目标提高其前瞻记忆成绩,当目标显著时无需强调其重要性,若无法设置显著的目标,则通过强调任务重要性提高前瞻记忆表现。     

背景任务刺激间的时距对前瞻干扰效应的影响

前瞻记忆是指形成和保持一个意向直到合适的情境或时间再执行的一种记忆任务。由于在执行背景任务的过程中保持和提取前瞻意向, 使成功执行前瞻记忆任务与加工背景任务之间存在着相互影响。保持前瞻记忆意向对背景任务的反应时和正确率有影响的现象称之为前瞻干扰效应。本研究通过操纵背景任务刺激间时距的两个实验, 考察了背景任务刺激间时距长度对时间性前瞻记忆和事件性前瞻记忆干扰效应量的对比关系的影响。结果发现随着背景任务刺激间时距缩短, 两类前瞻记忆干扰效应量的对比关系发生了变化, 且在背景任务刺激间时距长度不同的情况下执行时间性前瞻记忆任务时, 被试查看时钟的策略也有差异。提示了时间性前瞻记忆任务与事件性前瞻记忆任务认知加工机制上的不同。     

进行中任务变化对轻度认知功能障碍者基于事件前瞻记忆的影响

本实验采用2被试组别(MCI组、正常老年组) × 3进行中任务变化(无变化、顺序变化、随机变化)被试间设计探究进行中任务变化对轻度认知功能障碍者基于事件前瞻记忆的影响。结果表明：(1)轻度认知功能障碍者的前瞻记忆成绩显著低于正常老年人的前瞻记忆成绩; (2)进行中任务变化对两组被试前瞻记忆和进行中任务的反应时影响存在显著差异。进行中任务变化越大, 轻度认知功能障碍者完成前瞻记忆和进行中任务的反应速度越慢; 而正常老年被试则不受影响。研究支持前瞻记忆策略加工的理论观点, 认为执行功能损伤可能是导致轻度认知功能障碍者前瞻记忆失败的主要原因。     

注意状态、认知方式与前瞻记忆的TAP效应

采用经典实验室研究范式,实验一探讨了前瞻记忆任务为知觉加工条件下,注意状态和前瞻记忆任务与进行中任务一致和不一致时对不同认知方式个体前瞻记忆成绩的影响,实验二探讨了前瞻记忆任务为语义加工条件下,注意状态和前瞻记忆任务与进行中任务一致和不一致时对不同认知方式个体前瞻记忆成绩的影响,结果表明,（1）在前瞻记忆任务加工类型是语义加工和知觉加工两种条件下,场依存与场独立个体均发现了TAP效应的存在,而且场依存个体表现出更明显的TAP效应;（2）当前瞻记忆任务与进行中任务的加工类型不一致时,场独立个体的前瞻记忆成绩明显高于场依存个体,而在两类任务加工类型一致情况下,场独立与场依存个体的前瞻记忆成绩不存在明显差异;（3）在前瞻记忆任务是知觉加工时,分心对前瞻记忆成绩有明显不利的影响;而在前瞻记忆任务是语义加工时,只有当前瞻记忆任务与进行中任务加工类型不一致时,分心对前瞻记忆才有明显不利的影响,而且在分心条件下的TAP效应更明显。     

前瞻记忆的干扰效应：多重加工的证据

通过2个实验,对背景任务时间充裕和紧迫两种情况下的具体事件意向、类别事件意向、时间点意向、时间段意向四种前瞻记忆任务对背景任务的干扰效应进行考察。结果表明,在背景任务时间充裕情况下,类别事件意向对背景任务有干扰效应,具体事件意向、时间段意向和时间点意向都没有前瞻干扰效应;在背景任务时间紧迫情况下,时间点意向产生了干扰效应,具体事件意向、类别事件意向、时间段意向均无干扰效应。结果支持前瞻记忆的实现依赖多重加工的观点,时间性前瞻记忆并不一定比事件性前瞻记忆产生更大的干扰。     

进行中任务加工类型对前瞻记忆TAP效应的影响

该研究采用基于双重任务的实验研究范式,采用双字词作为实验材料,考察了知觉和语义两种进行中任务加工类型对前瞻记忆TAP效应的影响。结果发现：进行中任务加工类型对前瞻记忆绩效的TAP效应有显著影响。当进行中任务为知觉加工时,前瞻记忆任务的绩效存在显著的TAP效应;当进行中任务为语义加工时,前瞻记忆任务绩效的TAP效应没有出现。     

从ERP研究看前瞻记忆的神经基础和认知加工机制

关于前瞻记忆的ERP研究主要关注两个方面：神经基础和认知加工机制。神经基础方面的研究发现：前瞻记忆诱发了两种特异性的ERP成分—— N300和前瞻性正波; 前瞻记忆与回溯性记忆的神经基础有相似又有不同; 老年人的前瞻记忆可能存在一种不同于年轻人的神经机制。认知加工机制方面的研究主要为前瞻记忆的预备注意加工和记忆加工理论提供了ERP方面的证据支持。     

一种混合型前瞻记忆的加工机制

通过两个实验, 对以往研究忽略的一种基于事件进行反应、且具有时间线索的混合型前瞻记忆的加工过程进行考察。结果表明, 这种混合型的前瞻记忆可以通过控制加工或自动加工提取, 还可能两种加工交替存在, 被试在执行过程中, 根据时间信息, 有选择地、动态地将注意资源投入于不同时间段, 现有理论不能解释这种现象。对多重加工理论进行补充, 使之能够解释这种混合型前瞻记忆的加工机制。     

Prospective memory: Are preparatory attentional processes necessary for a single focal cue?

The preparatory attentional and memory processes theory of prospective memory (PM) assumes that PM retrieval requires resource-demanding preparatory attentional processes, whereas the multiprocess theory assumes that retrieval can also occur spontaneously. On the basis of showing slowing on an ongoing task (i.e., task interference) —even when the PM cue was highly salient (i.e., the participant’s own name) —Smith, Hunt, McVay, and McConnell (2007) concluded that preparatory attentional processes are always necessary for PM retrieval. We argue that the presence of preparatory attentional processes cannot be used to rule out the existence of spontaneous retrieval processes, and the goal of the present research was to examine whether PM retrieval can occur in the absence of preparatory attentional processes. We varied whether we emphasized the importance of the PM task or the ongoing task, and we assessed task interference across quarters of the ongoing task. Our results showed no evidence of task interference and, hence, no evidence of preparatory attentional processes in the periods proximal to the target event, and yet participants showed high PM performance. Thus, the results suggest the existence of spontaneous retrieval processes and support the multiprocess theory.     

The cost of event-based prospective memory: salient target events

Evidence has begun to accumulate showing that successful performance of event-based prospective memory (PM) comes at a cost to other ongoing activities. The current study builds on previous work by examining the cost associated with PM when the target event is salient. Target salience is among the criteria for automatic retrieval of intentions according to the multiprocess view of PM. An alternative theory, the preparatory attentional and memory processes theory, argues that PM performance, including retrieval of the intent, is never automatic and successful performance always will come at a cost to other ongoing activity. The 4 experiments reported here used a salient PM target event. In addition, Experiments 3 and 4 were designed to meet the stringent criteria proposed for automatic retrieval of intentions by multiprocess theory, and, yet, in all 4 experiments, delayed intentions interfered with ongoing task performance.     

一种混合型前瞻记忆的干扰效应的神经机制

采用3（任务类型）×2（时段）被试内实验设计,对比一种混合型前瞻记忆（MPM）和基于事件的前瞻记忆（EBPM）在不同时段对进行中任务的干扰效应的神经机制。结果表明,在目标出现的时段,MPM对进行中任务有干扰效应,额区电极最活跃,额区电压最高,而在非目标时段MPM无干扰效应,但刺激出现后200-300ms额区电极较活跃。说明前瞻记忆任务在大脑中可能处于较高的激活状态,额叶灵活地调配意识的不同状态在前瞻记忆加工中参与的程度和时段。     

Individual differences in event-based prospective memory: Evidence for multiple processes supporting cue detection

The multiprocess view proposes that different processes can be used to detect event-based prospective memory cues, depending in part on the specificity of the cue. According to this theory, attentional processes are not necessary to detect focal cues, whereas detection of nonfocal cues requires some form of controlled attention. This notion was tested using a design in which we compared performance on a focal and on a nonfocal prospective memory task by participants with high or low working memory capacity. An interaction was found, such that participants with high and low working memory performed equally well on the focal task, whereas the participants with high working memory performed significantly better on the nonfocal task than did their counterparts with low working memory. Thus, controlled attention was only necessary for detecting event-based prospective memory cues in the nonfocal task. These results have implications for theories of prospective memory, the processes necessary for cue detection, and the successful fulfillment of intentions.     

Event-based prospective memory in depression: The impact of cue focality

This study is the first to compare event-based prospective memory performance in individuals with depression and healthy controls. The degree to which self-initiated processing is required to perform the prospective memory task was varied. Twenty-eight individuals with depression and 32 healthy controls worked on a computerised prospective memory task. Prospective cues were either presented focally or non-focally to the ongoing activity. Collapsing data across both conditions, controls outperformed individuals with depression in the prospective memory task. Overall, participants showed a poorer prospective memory performance in the non-focal condition that required self-initiated processing to a higher degree than the focal condition. Importantly, as revealed by a group by task condition interaction, groups did not differ in the focal condition, whereas, controls outperformed individuals with depression in the non-focal condition. The results are in line with the multiprocess framework of event-based prospective remembering and the cognitive-initiative account of depression-related cognitive deficits.     

Wait a second: Brief delays in responding reduce focality effects in event-based prospective memory

Remembering to perform deferred actions when an event is encountered in the future is referred to as event-based prospective memory (PM). We examined whether the failure of individuals to allocate sufficient attentional resources to nonfocal PM tasks can be linked to the response demands inherent in PM paradigms that require the PM task to race for response selection with the speeded ongoing task. In three experiments, participants performed a lexical decision task while being required to make a separate PM response to a specific word (focal), an exemplar of a category (nonfocal), or a syllable (nonfocal). We manipulated the earliest time participants could make task responses by presenting a tone at varying onsets (0–1,600 ms) following stimulus presentation. Improvements in focal PM and nonfocal PM were observed at response delays as brief as 200 ms and 400 ms, respectively. Nonfocal PM accuracy was comparable to focal PM accuracy at delays of 600 ms and 1,600 ms for categorical targets and syllable targets, respectively. Delaying task responses freed the resource-demanding processing operations used on the ongoing task for use on the nonfocal PM task, increasing the probability that the nonfocal PM features of ongoing task stimuli were adequately assessed prior to the ongoing task response.     

Disruptions of preparatory attention contribute to failures of prospective memory

In two experiments, we examine the efficacy of preparatory attentional processes and intention superiority as explanations of the finding that response time (RT) for prospective memory (PM) cue misses is often faster than that for ongoing activity trials or PM cue hits. RT was faster for prospective misses than for ongoing activity trials, demonstrating an intention superiority effect. RT was also faster for ongoing activity trials preceding prospective misses than for those preceding prospective hits. We interpret this finding as reflecting variation in the efficiency of preparatory attentional processes during task performance, leading to failures of PM when preparatory attentional processes are suboptimal.     

Adult age differences in event-based prospective memory: a meta-analysis on the role of focal versus nonfocal cues

Studies of age differences in event-based prospective memory indicate wide variation in the magnitude of age effects. One explanation derived from the multiprocess framework proposes that age differences depend on whether the cue to carry out a prospective intention is focal to ongoing task processing. A meta-analysis of 117 effect sizes from 4,709 participants provided evidence for this view, as age effects were greater when the prospective cue to the ongoing task was nonfocal compared with when it was focal. However, the results only support a weaker but not a stronger prediction of the multiprocess framework, as age impairments were reliably above zero for both types of retrieval cues.     

Adapting to changing memory retrieval demands: Evidence from event-related potentials

This study investigated preparatory processes involved in adapting to changing episodic memory retrieval demands. Event-related potentials (ERPs) were recorded while participants performed a general old/new recognition task and a specific task that also required retrieval of perceptual details. The relevant task remained either constant or changed (predictably or randomly) across trials. Responses were slowed when participants switched from the specific to the general task but not vice versa. Hence, asymmetrical switch costs were observed, suggesting that retrieval preparation is dependent not only on the current retrieval goal but also influenced by recent retrieval attempts. Consistently, over posterior scalp regions ERPs associated with advance preparation were modulated by the preceding task, reflecting increased attentional selection requirements for the general task, and by the foreknowledge about the task sequence. When retrieval demands remained constant, frontal slow-waves elicited by retrieval-cues were more positive going for the specific task, indicating full implementation of a retrieval orientation that allows more efficient retrieval of perceptual details.