注意范围分布对视觉工作记忆巩固过程的影响

以往研究发现个体能够同时巩固一定数量的项目信息进入视觉工作记忆系统。本研究将考察视觉工作记忆的巩固容量是否会受到分配到记忆项目上的注意资源量的影响。实验1在同时序列掩蔽范式的基础上, 用控制记忆项目呈现区域的大小的方法操纵被试的注意范围, 从而达到操纵分配到单个项目上的注意资源量的目的。研究结果显示, 被试的记忆成绩随着注意范围的扩大显著降低, 但在并行和序列呈现条件之间不存在显著差异; 实验2则证实实验1中对注意资源量分配的控制不会影响对项目的知觉编码效率。本研究结果表明, 分配在记忆项目上的注意资源量能够影响记忆巩固的效率, 但不会影响巩固容量。

The effects of the attention resource allocation on visual working memory consolidation process

Visual working memory (VWM) consolidation refers to the process of transforming a fleeting sensory representation into a relatively durable VWM representation which could be maintained briefly. It plays an important role in the process of visual information. In recent years, researchers have begun to shift the research focus from the time course of consolidation process to the consolidation capacity. They have found that consolidation capacity not only depends on the number of items which could be consolidated at the same time, but could be also affected by the allocation of attention resources caused by spatial scale. However, the simultaneous-sequential paradigm used in previous studies might be interfered with by some extraneous variables, such as the location of stimulus presentation, resulting in the inconsistent results of VWM consolidation studies.In Experiment 1, two masked colored patches (targets) were briefly presented (either simultaneous or sequential) within a virtual large circle (10° to 15° but 50% at 8°) or a virtual small circle (5.2° to 7.9° but 50% at 8°), and each condition was presented in different blocks of trials. Following the targets, a blank screen preceded the onset of a colored probe. Participants were asked to memorize the targets frames and indicate by a button press whether the probe was the same as any one of the targets. The results show that no difference was found between sequential and simultaneous presentation conditions, while the performance for small circle presentation was better than that for large circle presentation. These results correspond with previous studies and suggest that the variation of attention scope has no impact on the consolidation capacity. In Experiment 2, a colored target was presented, follow by two masked colored patches. Participants needed to judge if the target matched any of the masked colored patches. The variation of presentation scope was identical to that of Experiment 1. The results show no significant difference between the large and small attention scope condition. These results show no evidence for the effect of attention scope on the perceptual process and suggest that attention resource allocation caused by attention scope could affect the probability of VWM consolidation, but it does not influence the consolidation capacity.