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。     

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。     

情绪作为事件性前瞻记忆的附加线索:相反效价增强效应

使用前瞻记忆双任务实验范式,同时操纵当前任务与前瞻任务包含的情绪效价以及前瞻记忆的前瞻成分和回溯成分的情绪效价,考察双任务和两成分效价一致或相反条件对事件性前瞻记忆加工的影响。结果发现,与情绪效价一致时相比,双任务的效价相反时前瞻记忆更能正确执行,两成分情绪效价相反时前瞻成分完成更好。这种相反效价增强前瞻记忆的效应表明情绪作为附加线索影响了事件性前瞻记忆加工过程。     

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。     

基于不同情绪的前瞻记忆及TAP效应的影响研究

前瞻记忆是指现在对将来某一段时间要做的行为的记忆。采用情绪图片作为诱发材料,研究了在情绪刺激下前瞻记忆任务以及前瞻记忆TAP效应的影响。结果表明:不同情绪效价主效应显著,正性情绪组成绩显著高于中性情绪组和负性情绪组; 前瞻记忆TAP效应在正性情绪和中性情绪下显著,负性情绪下部分显著; 在不同情绪效价影响下,语义—语义组、语义—知觉组、知觉—知觉组以及知觉—语义组的前瞻记忆成绩差异均存在统计学意义。     

前瞻记忆的情绪一致性反转效应

采用经典双任务实验范式,探讨前瞻记忆的情绪一致性效应及其理论模型。情绪电影片段诱发被试高兴或悲伤情绪后,观察被试在高兴、悲伤和自然情绪状态下的前瞻记忆任务和当前任务的成绩。结果发现,情绪一致性前瞻记忆出现反转效应,即在高兴背景下前瞻记忆负性词比正性词成绩好,在悲伤背景下前瞻记忆正性词比负性词成绩好。实验结果支持前瞻记忆的注意—搜索模型,不支持自动激活模型。     

A/B型人格对时间性前瞻记忆的影响

通过对比A/B两种人格者在执行即无社会关系特征又无个人重要性的时间性前瞻记忆任务时的时间性前瞻记忆成绩和在执行时间性前瞻记忆过程中的时间监控模式,发现A/B型人格的背景任务成绩和TBPM任务成绩都没有显著差异,而时间监视模式有显著差异。说明A型人格被试能更高效的利用认知资源,以更高效和更策略的时间监控模式完成TBPM任务。也说明TBPM是一类与时间监控能力密切相关的前瞻记忆类型。     

意向保持间隔对时间性前瞻记忆的影响

通过两个实验来探讨意向保持间隔对时间性前瞻记忆的影响。实验一仅通过嵌入前瞻目标的背景任务来操纵保持间隔,实验二通过在背景任务之前加入不同时长的填充任务来改变意向保持间隔。结果发现,(1)背景任务中的保持间隔越长,前瞻记忆成绩越差;(2)背景任务中的保持间隔和填充任务的时长对前瞻记忆的影响存在交互作用。成绩最好的为15min-2min组,最差的为15min-15min组。结果表明,背景任务和填充任务阶段对于个体保持前瞻意向可能有不同的功能。     

事件性前瞻记忆的自我参照效应

采用前瞻记忆的双任务实验范式,通过两个实验,探讨在高、低当前任务负载条件下,人格形容词的自我参照对事件性前瞻记忆的影响,以确定事件性前瞻记忆的加工机制。结果发现,自我参照能导致对事件性前瞻记忆双任务材料的更深层加工,从而有效提高前瞻记忆表现。同时,自我参照效应对事件性前瞻记忆的影响还受到当前任务负载的调节,表明前瞻记忆的提取受到自发与策略加工的动态交互影响,符合前瞻记忆的多重加工理论。     

时间性前瞻记忆的影响因素及机制

时间性前瞻记忆是指个体记得在未来的某一时间或间隔一段时间以后做某事。与事件性前瞻记忆相比, 时间性前瞻记忆需要更多自我启动的注意资源, 并主要受到任务重要性、年龄、进行中任务的性质、时间间隔等因素的影响。时间性前瞻记忆主要与额叶有关, 对于其内部认知机制解释的理论模型主要有测试-等待-测试-退出模型以及注意阀门模型。但是时间性前瞻记忆的影响因素以及机制, 尤其是神经机制方面尚需要进一步的研究。     

负性情绪背景和延迟对时间性前瞻记忆的影响

采用2（情绪效价：负性、中性）×2（延迟设置：无延迟、有延迟）的实验设计,探究负性情绪对时间性前瞻记忆的干扰效应。结果显示在无延迟条件下,负性情绪组的前瞻记忆成绩差于中性情绪组,负性情绪组的总时间监控次数和监控后期的时间监控次数均少于中性情绪组;在有延迟条件下,负性情绪组的前瞻记忆成绩和监控后期的时间监控次数与中性情绪组均无差异。结果说明负性情绪会干扰时间性前瞻记忆,而延迟可以消除这种干扰效应。     

Time-based prospective remembering: Interference and facilitation in a dual task

The aim of this study was to analyse prospective memory behaviour when people have to fulfil two different intentions whose retention intervals partially overlapped. More specifically, the purpose of the study was to explore the effects of a secondary PM task (either time-based or event-based) on performance of a main time-based PM task. Four embedded conditions were tested: two event-based ones and two time-based ones. The time- and event-based interpolated tasks differed in how closely their target time was to the 20-minute response required by the main time-based task (16th and 19th min., respectively). The results indicated that when a main time-based prospective memory task shares a portion of the retention interval with a second time-based prospective task, this overlapping facilitated performance on the main task. However, the interpolated tasks appeared to be affected by the moment in which they were administered during the execution of the main time-based task. More specifically, a decrease in the interpolated task performance was observed when this was time-based and had to be executed very closely to the target time of the main task. On the contrary, when the two tasks were different (event-based vs. time-based), there was neither interference, nor facilitation.     

Comparing time-based and event-based prospective memory over short delays

The current study compared monitoring in time- and event-based prospective memory (PM). Time- and event-based non-focal task instructions were given after a baseline block of a lexical decision ongoing task. Delay between instruction and presentation of PM cue/time was manipulated between-subjects to examine monitoring across short delays (1–6?min). Longer delays decreased performance in the event-based task, but not in the time-based task. This accuracy decline was accompanied by a decline in monitoring (as measured by PM cost to the ongoing task in the trials immediately before the PM cue was presented) between the 1 and 3?min delays. Monitoring was only evident for the time-based task at the 6?min delay as measured by PM cost to the ongoing task. Clock checks were also not affected by delay, but did increase in frequency as the response time neared. These results suggest that delay from the time of intention formation decreases both accuracy and monitoring in event-based tasks, but does not decrease accuracy or monitoring in time-based tasks.     

Varying the importance of a prospective memory task: differential effects across time- and event-based prospective memory

Only few studies have addressed the issue of task importance in prospective memory. Most of them, but not all, have shown that perceived task importance does improve prospective memory performance. However, there is little understanding of (1) the conditions under which importance of the prospective memory task makes a difference in performance and (2) the mechanisms by which perceived task importance has an effect on prospective memory performance. The present study reports two experiments that manipulate task importance in a time-based and an event-based prospective memory paradigm. Results show that importance has an effect on the time-based but not on the event-based task. Further analyses of the performance in the cover tasks as well as the monitoring behaviour indicate that importance improves prospective memory to the degree the task requires the strategic allocation of attentional resources.     

Age-related differences and complexity of ongoing activities in time- and event-based prospective memory

Aging is presumed to disrupt self-initiated processing, and a time-based prospective memory task (i.e., action to be performed at a particular time) entails more self-initiated activities than an event-based prospective memory task (i.e., action to be performed to a critical event). Accordingly, older participants are predicted to be particularly bad in a time-based prospective memory task. However, the prediction is not always confirmed. Self-initiated activities entail central executive functioning. We therefore predicted the age deficit to emerge more clearly when the performance on the ongoing task also involved more central executive functioning. Time-based prospective memory among older adults collapsed when the complexity of the ongoing task increased. However, an age deficit was also obtained when the pacing of the event-based prospective memory task was high because of the general slowing of functioning by older adults.     

Time-based and event-based prospective memory across adulthood: underlying mechanisms and differential costs on the ongoing task

The authors investigated the phenomenon that performance in an ongoing task declines when individuals must carry out a prospective memory (PM) task. This effect is referred to as the PM interference effect. The authors examined whether the PM interference effect differs between event-based and time-based PM tasks and whether it is increased among the elderly. The authors also investigated adult age differences in PM performance and the potential underlying mechanisms of the age deficits in PM. They found that the PM interference effect was greater in event-based than in time-based tasks. However, aging was not associated with an increase in PM interference effects. Age differences in PM performance were more exaggerated in time-based than event-based PM, but they were not mediated by age differences in traditional cognitive ability measures. In time-based PM, age showed a unique adverse effect even after controlling for the ability to externally monitor the time, leading to the possibility that aging disrupts time-based PM because of deficits in internally processing the time.     

The Duration and Intensity of the Exposure Light as Factors in Determining the Course of the Subsequent Dark-Adaptation: I. the Matching Method

The authors investigated the phenomenon that performance in an ongoing task declines when individuals must carry out a prospective memory (PM) task. This effect is referred to as the PM interference effect. The authors examined whether the PM interference effect differs between event-based and time-based PM tasks and whether it is increased among the elderly. The authors also investigated adult age differences in PM performance and the potential underlying mechanisms of the age deficits in PM. They found that the PM interference effect was greater in event-based than in time-based tasks. However, aging was not associated with an increase in PM interference effects. Age differences in PM performance were more exaggerated in time-based than event-based PM, but they were not mediated by age differences in traditional cognitive ability measures. In time-based PM, age showed a unique adverse effect even after controlling for the ability to externally monitor the time, leading to the possibility that aging disrupts time-based PM because of deficits in internally processing the time.     

Cognitive load and task condition in event- and time-based prospective memory: an experimental investigation

Prospective memory is memory for the realization of delayed intention. Researchers distinguish 2 kinds of prospective memory: event- and time-based (G. O. Einstein & M. A. McDaniel, 1990). Taking that distinction into account, the present authors explored participants' comparative performance under event- and time-based tasks. In an experimental study of 80 participants, the authors investigated the roles of cognitive load and task condition in prospective memory. Cognitive load (low vs. high) and task condition (event- vs. time-based task) were the independent variables. Accuracy in prospective memory was the dependent variable. Results showed significant differential effects under event- and time-based tasks. However, the effect of cognitive load was more detrimental in time-based prospective memory. Results also revealed that time monitoring is critical in successful performance of time estimation and so in time-based prospective memory. Similarly, participants' better performance on the event-based prospective memory task showed that they acted on the basis of environment cues. Event-based prospective memory was environmentally cued; time-based prospective memory required self-initiation.