工作记忆表征对视觉注意的影响:基于非目标模板的视角

储存在工作记忆中的视觉表征会影响注意选择过程。其中,与目标有关的工作记忆表征(靶子模板)对视觉注意起到自上而下的引导作用,而与目标无关的工作记忆表征(非目标模板)亦会对注意分配产生影响。本文通过系统分析非目标工作记忆表征影响视觉搜索过程的相关研究,发现非目标模板在视觉搜索任务中既存在自动化的注意捕获,也会形成主动抑制以提高目标搜索绩效。进一步地,对非目标模板的注意捕获或抑制受实验范式、任务难度、刺激材料特征以及认知控制水平等因素的影响。未来研究应该在不断深入细化变量操纵、完善变量控制的同时,进一步扩展应用领域的研究。     

视觉工作记忆对前注意阶段注意定向的调节

在注意阶段,视觉工作记忆与注意共享某些特征时,视觉工作记忆内容会引导注意定向。在前注意阶段的影响又是如何？对此问题的研究却很少见,本研究采用工作记忆与基于特征的视觉搜索相结合的任务深入探讨了此问题。研究结果发现：即使在前注意阶段,注意定向也会受到视觉工作记忆自上而下的调节。然而与注意阶段不同的是：当视觉工作记忆内容与随后视觉搜索任务的目标相关时,与记忆内容匹配的搜索项目会引导注意定向到该项目所在的位置,但只有此项目作为分心物时,才会明显地延迟对靶子的加工,而此项目作为靶子时,这种影响并不明显;当视觉工作记忆中保持的项目与随后视觉搜索任务的目标无关时,注意会忽略视觉工作记忆中保持的项目,有效地检测靶子     

认知控制在工作记忆表征引导注意中的作用:来自眼动的证据

研究同时采用首次注视点百分率与行为反应时指标,探讨了认知控制在无关工作记忆表征引导视觉注意选择过程中的作用。实验1发现:当视觉搜索容易时,首次注视点百分率和反应时指标都出现了注意引导效应;而当视觉搜索困难时,在反映早期注意定向的首次注视点百分率指标上,搜索快的被试组的注意引导效应显著大于搜索慢的被试组,而在行为反应时指标上,搜索快的被试组表现出注意引导效应,但搜索慢的被试组则表现出相反的注意拒绝效应。实验2发现当采用更为突显的靶子刺激时,首次注视点百分率指标上表现出的注意引导效应并未受到视觉搜索靶子显著性的影响,甚至还表现出一定的优先性。这些结果表明认知控制在工作记忆表征引导视觉注意的过程中所起的作用是动态变化的,视觉搜索早期注意定向阶段的注意引导效应比较稳健,认知控制只能减弱其效应的量值,而在随后的视觉搜索过程中,当视觉搜索比较缓慢时,认知控制可能会将注意引导效应反转为相反的注意拒绝效应。     

工作记忆表征引导视觉注意选择的眼动研究

工作记忆表征能否引导视觉注意选择？目前实验结果尚不一致。有研究者认为能否观察到注意引导效应取决于视觉搜索类型。研究采用工作记忆任务与视觉搜索任务相结合的双任务范式, 结合眼动追踪技术, 对不同视觉搜索类型下的注意引导效应进行验证。实验1结果发现, 不管视觉搜索任务的靶子是否变化, 在早期的眼动指标上都发现了显著的注意引导效应, 但注意引导效应在靶子固定的视觉搜索任务下表现得更强。实验2在平衡两种视觉搜索任务中的工作记忆负载后发现, 两种视觉搜索任务下都出现了显著的注意引导效应, 但没有发现实验1中所出现的任务间差异。实验结果否定了视觉搜索类型对注意引导效应的决定性影响, 同时也提示工作记忆负载可能在注意引导效应中起重要作用。     

视觉搜索中注意模板促进搜索的内在机制

生物的视觉搜索能力对适应外部复杂环境具有非常重要的生存意义。注意模板可以在搜索任务的过程中增强相关信息和抑制无关信息, 从而快速找到目标。总结近期研究结果主要有以下发现：在建立注意模板的过程中并不能明确是基于语义信息还是视觉特征信息; 注意模板不仅可以存储在工作记忆中, 也可以存储在长时记忆中; 不同类型注意模板的神经机制存在差异。未来的研究应关注注意模板在建立过程中内部信息如何传递, 并关注不同人群注意模板的神经机制, 以及解决拒绝模板抑制机制的理论争议。     

视觉工作记忆在视觉搜索中的作用

视觉工作记忆在视觉搜索中的作用远比偏向竞争模型所描述的要复杂,个体能根据当前任务要求灵活地利用工作记忆来引导注意选择。在系统回顾已有研究的基础上,从客体工作记忆、空间工作记忆和执行工作记忆3个方面探讨了视觉工作记忆在视觉搜索中的作用。根据近期的研究,文章在最后对视觉工作记忆在视觉搜索中的作用做了7点总结,并对已往研究中存在的若干问题给予了解释,指出未来应该从前瞻记忆和内隐记忆等角度对视觉搜索中所涉及的视觉记忆进行深入研究     

篮球运动员视觉工作记忆对注意控制的影响

采用视觉搜索任务范式,以不同工作记忆容量的篮球运动员作为研究参与者,探讨了视觉工作记忆对自上而下注意控制的影响。结果表明,不同视觉工作记忆容量的篮球运动员的注意控制能力存在差异,高视觉工作记忆容量组的成绩略优于低视觉工作记忆容量的篮球运动员;视觉工作记忆中信息性质影响注意控制,其影响作用是通过记忆项目特征与目标项目特征相匹配的情况来实现,这个影响过程不受视觉工作记忆容量大小的调节。     

视觉搜索中基于工作记忆内容的注意捕获与抑制

注意是对有关信息的选择及对无关信息的抑制, 工作记忆是对有关信息的保持以及对无关信息的抑制, 两者在一定程度上都体现了选择性地指向与当前任务有关的刺激并同时抑制无关刺激。在系统地回顾已有研究的基础上结合新近的ERP研究, 从视觉搜索中基于工作记忆内容的注意捕获与注意抑制两个角度综述了视觉工作记忆与视觉选择性注意的相关研究。研究者们主要从两方面对该领域的问题进行了探讨：(1)视觉工作记忆内容对视觉选择性注意的导向作用; (2)视觉工作记忆内容对视觉选择性注意产生导向作用的条件。文章对以往的研究进行了总结, 指出了无论保持在视觉工作记忆的内容是捕获注意还是受到抑制, 都存在着自上而下和自下而上两种加工机制。     

数学学习困难与工作记忆关系研究的现状与前瞻

工作记忆是一种对信息进行暂时加工和贮存的能量有限的记忆系统,在许多复杂的认知活动中起重要作用,工作记忆缺陷是造成数学学习困难的根本原因。数学学习困难儿童都存在视觉空间模板、语音回路以及中央执行器功能等方面的缺陷,工作记忆的各成分对数学困难者的影响不同。今后研究将以整体的、发展的视角,不断改进研究方法,将行为研究和神经加工机制研究相结合。     

视觉搜索中的情绪干扰项预习效应

干扰项预习效应是视觉搜索的试次间效应, 反映了过去不成功的搜索经验对注意的抑制。本研究中, 被试对情绪材料进行视觉搜索时, 同一个画面中的刺激的情绪效价可能一致, 也可能存在一个效价与众不同的靶子。实验任务是要求被试找到该靶子, 并对它的非情绪特征进行辨别反应。本研究包括3个实验, 分别采用情绪面孔的照片、情绪性动物图片、情绪性动物示意图, 均发现了情绪干扰项预习效应。也就是说, 当先呈现无靶子的试次再呈现有靶子的试次, 且有靶子的试次中干扰项的效价与之前无靶子试次中的刺激的效价一致时, 被试的反应要比靶子的效价与之前无靶子试次中刺激效价一致时更快。这些结果表明, 选择性注意系统可以利用以往的情绪信息引导注意的分配, 使当前注意偏离那些曾经搜索过但没有找到靶子的情绪特征, 而且这些情绪信息可能是由人脸表达的, 也可能是由于人以外的因素表达的。这些结果体现了情绪与认知的交互作用, 尤其是个体对情绪的已有经验对视觉选择注意的引导作用。     

Strategic and automatic effects of visual working memory on attention in visual search

Previous research indicates that visual attention can be automatically captured by sensory inputs that match the contents of visual working memory. However, Woodman and Luck (2007) showed that information in working memory can be used flexibly as a template for either selection or rejection according to task demands. We report two experiments that extend their work. Participants performed a visual search task while maintaining items in visual working memory. Memory items were presented for either a short or long exposure duration immediately prior to the search task. Memory was tested by a change-detection task immediately afterwards. On a random half of trials items in memory matched either one distractor in the search task (Experiment 1) or three (Experiment 2). The main result was that matching distractors speeded or slowed target detection depending on whether memory items were presented for a long or short duration. These effects were more in evidence with three matching distractors than one. We conclude that the influence of visual working memory on visual search is indeed flexible but is not solely a function of task demands. Our results suggest that attentional capture by perceptual inputs matching information in visual working memory involves a fast automatic process that can be overridden by a slower top-down process of attentional avoidance.     

Visual Search Remains Efficient When Visual Working Memory is Full

Many theories of attention have proposed that visual working memory plays an important role in visual search tasks. The present study examined the involvement of visual working memory in search using a dual-task paradigm in which participants performed a visual search task while maintaining no, two, or four objects in visual working memory. The presence of a working memory load added a constant delay to the visual search reaction times, irrespective of the number of items in the visual search array. That is, there was no change in the slope of the function relating reaction time to the number of items in the search array, indicating that the search process itself was not slowed by the memory load. Moreover, the search task did not substantially impair the maintenance of information in visual working memory. These results suggest that visual search requires minimal visual working memory resources, a conclusion that is inconsistent with theories that propose a close link between attention and working memory.     

The boundary conditions of priming of visual search: From passive viewing through task-relevant working memory load

Priming of visual search has a dominating effect upon attentional shifts and is thought to play a decisive role in visual stability. Despite this importance, the nature of the memory underlying priming remains controversial. To understand more fully the necessary conditions for priming, we contrasted passive versus active viewing of visual search arrays. There was no priming from passive viewing of search arrays, while it was strong for active search of the same displays. Displays requiring no search resulted in no priming, again showing that search is needed for priming to occur. Finally, we introduced working memory load during visual search in an effort to disrupt priming. The memorized items had either the same colors as or different colors from the visual search items. Retaining items in working memory inhibited priming of the working memory task-relevant colors, while little interference was observed for unrelated colors. The picture that emerges of priming is that it requires active attentional processing of the search items in addition to the operation of visual working memory, where the task relevance of the working memory load plays a key role.     

Visual search is guided by prospective and retrospective memory

Although there has been some controversy as to whether attention is guided by memory during visual search, recent findings have suggested that memory helps to prevent attention from needlessly reinspecting examined items. Until now, it has been assumed that some form of retrospective memory is responsible for keeping track of examined items and preventing revisitations. Alternatively, some form of prospective memory, such as strategic scanpath planning, could be responsible for guiding attention away from examined items. We used a new technique that allowed us to selectively prevent retrospective or prospective memory from contributing to search. We demonstrated that both retrospective and prospective memory guide attention during visual search.     

The role of memory and restricted context in repeated visual search

Previous studies have shown that the efficiency of visual search does not improve when participants search through the same unchanging display for hundreds of trials (repeated search), even though the participants have a clear memory of the search display. In this article, we ask two important questions. First, why do participants not use memory to help search the repeated display? Second, can context be introduced so that participants are able to guide their attention to the relevant repeated items? Experiments 1-4 show that participants choose not to use a memory strategy because, under these conditions, repeated memory search is actually less efficient than repeated visual search, even though the latter task is in itself relatively inefficient. However, when the visual search task is given context, so that only a subset of the items are ever pertinent, participants can learn to restrict their attention to the relevant stimuli (Experiments 5 and 6).     

Looking sharp: Becoming a search template boosts precision and stability in visual working memory

Visual working memory (VWM) plays a central role in visual cognition, and current work suggests that there is a special state in VWM for items that are the goal of visual searches. However, whether the quality of memory for target templates differs from memory for other items in VWM is currently unknown. In this study, we measured the precision and stability of memory for search templates and accessory items to determine whether search templates receive representational priority in VWM. Memory for search templates exhibited increased precision and probability of recall, whereas accessory items were remembered less often. Additionally, while memory for Templates showed benefits when instances of the Template appeared in search, this benefit was not consistently observed for Accessory items when they appeared in search. Our results show that becoming a search template can substantially affect the quality of a representation in VWM.     

How Information Availability Interacts with Visual Attention during Judgment and Decision Tasks

Decisions in front of a supermarket shelf probably involve a mix of visually available information and associated memories—and interactions between those two. Several cognitive processes, such as decision making, search, and various judgments, are therefore likely to co‐occur, and each process will influence visual attention. We conducted two eye‐tracking experiments capturing parts of these features by having participants make either judgments or decisions concerning products that had been previously encoded. Half the time, participants made their choices with full information about the available products and half the time with crucial task‐relevant information removed. By comparing participants' use of visual attention during decisions and search‐based and memory‐based judgments, we can better understand how visual attention is differently employed between tasks and how it depends on the visual environment. We found that participants' visual attention during decisions is sensitive to evaluations already made during encoding and strongly characterized by preferential looking to the options later to be chosen. When the task environment is rich enough, participants engage in advanced integrative visual behavior and improve their decision quality. In contrast, visual attention during judgments made on the same products reflects a search‐like behavior when all information is available and a more focused type of visual behavior when information is removed. Our findings contribute not only to the literature on how visual attention is used during decision making but also to methodological questions concerning how to measure and identify task‐specific features of visual attention in ecologically valid ways. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Searching while loaded: Visual working memory does not interfere with hybrid search efficiency but hybrid search uses working memory capacity

In “hybrid search” tasks, such as finding items on a grocery list, one must search the scene for targets while also searching the list in memory. How is the representation of a visual item compared with the representations of items in the memory set? Predominant theories would propose a role for visual working memory (VWM) either as the site of the comparison or as a conduit between visual and memory systems. In seven experiments, we loaded VWM in different ways and found little or no effect on hybrid search performance. However, the presence of a hybrid search task did reduce the measured capacity of VWM by a constant amount regardless of the size of the memory or visual sets. These data are broadly consistent with an account in which VWM must dedicate a fixed amount of its capacity to passing visual representations to long-term memory for comparison to the items in the memory set. The data cast doubt on models in which the search template resides in VWM or where memory set item representations are moved from LTM through VWM to earlier areas for comparison to visual items.     

工作记忆表征捕获眼动中的颜色优先性

刺激属性所具有的引导效力在工作记忆表征自上而下地引导注意捕获过程中起重要作用, 已有研究表明工作记忆表征的颜色属性在引导注意时具有一定的优势。研究采用工作记忆任务与视觉搜索任务相结合的双任务范式, 结合眼动追踪技术, 通过设置具有较强引导效力的颜色属性与朝向属性进行直接竞争的实验条件, 进一步考察工作记忆表征的颜色属性是否依然具有优先性。实验1发现工作记忆表征的颜色属性与朝向属性同时竞争眼动捕获时, 颜色属性表现出较强的优势, 而朝向属性单独呈现时并未表现出任何捕获效应。实验2与3进一步证实了颜色属性捕获眼动的优先性, 即当颜色属性在面临作为靶子属性的朝向属性的竞争时, 依然能捕获更多的注视点。这些结果直接证实了工作记忆表征的颜色属性在工作记忆表征的捕获眼动的过程中具有较强的引导效力, 相对于其他刺激属性(如朝向、形状)更具有优先性。     

Memory for where, but not what, is used during visual search

Although the role of memory in visual search is debatable, most researchers agree with a limited-capacity model of memory in visual search. The authors demonstrate the role of memory by replicating previous findings showing that visual search is biased away from old items (previously examined items) and toward new items (nonexamined items). Furthermore, the authors examined the type of memory representations used to bias search by changing an item's individuating feature or location during search. Changing the individuating feature of an item did not disrupt normal search biases. However, when the location of an item changed, normal search biases were disrupted. These results suggest that memory used in visual search is based on items' locations rather than their identity.