网络成瘾倾向者在视觉工作记忆引导下的注意捕获

采用工作记忆任务和视觉搜索任务相结合的双任务范式, 探讨网络成瘾倾向者在视觉工作记忆引导下的注意捕获。实验1考察了单一分心刺激视场中分心刺激的性质对网络成瘾倾向者选择性注意的影响, 实验2通过控制匹配试验出现的概率来诱发不同的抑制动机, 探讨多分心刺激视场中两种抑制动机下网络成瘾倾向者的注意表现。结果发现：(1)无论在单一分心刺激还是多分心刺激视场中, 网络成瘾倾向被试的目标搜索反应时均显著短于正常组被试, 且两组的搜索正确率没有差异。(2)在单一分心刺激视场中, 无论是与工作记忆项目匹配还是不匹配的分心刺激都会捕获正常组被试的注意, 但不会捕获网络成瘾倾向被试的注意。(3)在多分心刺激视场中, 当抑制动机水平较低时, 两组被试均对匹配分心物产生注意捕获效应, 且网络成瘾倾向被试受工作记忆引导的注意捕获效应小于正常组被试; 当抑制动机较高时, 两组被试均对匹配分心物产生注意抑制效应, 且没有差异。研究结果表明, 面对非网络相关视觉刺激时, 网络成瘾倾向者受工作记忆引导的注意捕获效应小于正常组, 并表现出了知觉加工上的优势。     

无关长时记忆表征能否引导视觉注意选择?

与任务相关的长时记忆表征在引导视觉注意选择的过程中扮演着重要的角色,它可以使人们在熟悉的视觉情境中快速搜索目标刺激,并偏离干扰刺激。但当长时记忆表征与任务无关时,还能否引导视觉注意选择?目前还不清楚。实验1采用眼动追踪技术直接比较无关工作记忆表征与无关长时记忆表征在视觉搜索阶段对视觉注意的捕获效应,行为反应时与首次注视点百分率的结果都发现,当无关工作记忆表征在视觉搜索中再次出现时能引导视觉注意偏向到与之匹配的干扰刺激,但无关长时记忆表征并没有表现出类似的注意引导效应;实验2探讨记忆表征由工作记忆系统转移到长时记忆系统的过程中对视觉注意的引导效应,结果发现,随着记忆表征的转移,注意引导效应消失了,实验3排除工作记忆表征的干扰后,依然没有发现无关长时记忆表征对注意的引导效应。以上结果表明,无关长时记忆表征并不能像工作记忆表征一样引导视觉注意选择,工作记忆表征和长时记忆表征对视觉注意的引导属于两个不同的认知过程。     

颜色凸显条件下基于工作记忆内容的视觉注意

采用记忆任务与视觉搜索任务相结合的实验范式,通过操纵背景颜色与刺激颜色,考察了工作记忆内容对视觉注意的引导是否存在强自动性。实验一通过操作背景颜色以突显记忆项目,结果发现即使工作记忆内容在匹配分心物的情况下仍然自动地捕获视觉注意。实验二通过操作背景颜色以突显目标项目,结果发现工作记忆内容对视觉注意的自动引导作用消失。说明了与工作记忆内容匹配的刺激能够自动地引导视觉注意,但是这种引导并非完全自动化,具有一定的条件性。     

工作记忆表征的激活与抑制状态对注意引导效应的影响

本研究采用双任务范式, 通过定向遗忘任务操纵工作记忆表征状态, 分别在目标无关和目标相关条件下考察工作记忆激活与抑制状态对视觉搜索早期注意引导效应的影响。实验1与实验2发现当工作记忆表征只可能与视觉搜索分心物匹配时(目标无关条件), 处于激活状态的工作记忆表征会引导视觉注意偏向到与之匹配的分心物, 表现出注意引导效应, 而处于抑制状态的工作记忆表征则没有观察到注意引导效应。实验3与实验4发现, 当工作记忆表征有可能与视觉搜索目标匹配时(目标相关条件), 处于激活状态的工作记忆表征能捕获注意, 而处于抑制状态的工作记忆表征只有与视觉搜索目标匹配时, 才表现出对该搜索目标反应的延迟。这些研究的结果表明(1)处于激活状态的工作记忆表征能有效地引导注意偏向到与之匹配的搜索目标或分心物, 并且这种注意引导效应并未受到抑制动机的影响而被消除或反转; (2)处于抑制状态的工作记忆表征能将抑制状态传递到视觉搜索阶段, 并延迟对与之匹配的搜索目标的反应。     

言语工作记忆内容在语义水平的注意捕获

采用工作记忆−视觉搜索双任务范式, 探讨不同呈现方式下与言语工作记忆内容语义水平匹配的刺激的注意捕获效应。结果发现：(1)视觉呈现下, 与言语工作记忆内容知觉和语义匹配的刺激均能捕获注意, 且在视觉搜索快速反应的阶段仍能捕获注意; (2)听觉呈现下, 与言语工作记忆内容语义匹配的刺激不能捕获注意, 反而被抑制, 但在视觉搜索快速反应的早期阶段却能捕获注意。研究表明, 基于视听呈现的言语工作记忆内容在语义水平对注意的引导作用可发生在注意搜索过程快速反应的早期阶段。而晚期阶段由于受到跨通道注意选择的抑制, 听觉呈现下的语义表征不能捕获注意, 而视觉呈现下的语义表征仍能捕获注意。     

无关工作记忆表征的负性情绪信息能否捕获视觉注意?一项眼动研究

研究通过分析视觉搜索任务的首次注视点和行为反应时, 探讨无关工作记忆表征的负性情绪信息对视觉注意选择的影响。实验1发现在反映早期注意选择的首次注视点百分率指标上, 不管工作记忆表征的情绪效价如何, 均出现了显著的注意捕获效应; 实验2发现当采用中性情绪靶子刺激时, 首次注视点百分率指标上仍表现出了稳健的注意捕获效应; 在首次注视点持续时间指标上, 实验1和实验2均发现记忆匹配条件的干扰刺激显著小于控制条件的干扰刺激, 表现出注意的快速脱离; 而在行为反应时指标上, 早期的注意捕获效应消失(实验1), 甚至被反转为注意抑制效应(实验2)。这些结果表明在早期注意选择阶段, 记忆驱动的注意捕获效应不受工作记忆表征情绪效价的影响, 但认知控制会在早期注意捕获之后促使注意快速脱离记忆匹配的干扰刺激, 其作用效果受靶子刺激情绪效价的调节。     

视觉工作记忆对注意选择的自动导向作用

对Downing(2000)的实验范式加以改进使得实验设计完全符合检验记忆驱动注意捕获所需要满足的标准,实验一采用要求被试在工作记忆保持阶段完成探测区分任务的双任务范式,结果发现被试对呈现在匹配物体空间位置上的探测项反应时显著快于对呈现在非匹配物体空间位置上的探测项反应时,而在实验二中当对被试没有记忆要求时却没有发现这种空间位置一致的优势效应,说明视觉工作记忆内容对选择性注意产生了自动导向作用。     

客体工作记忆对注意的导向作用：抑制动机的影响

通过两个实验验证了客体工作记忆内容对注意的导向过程是灵活可控的; 与客体工作记忆内容匹配的刺激既可以捕获注意, 也可以被抑制。实验1通过操作匹配试验概率来诱发不同水平的抑制动机, 考察在客体工作记忆内容对注意的导向作用中抑制动机的影响。匹配试验中有分心物与客体工作记忆内容相同。控制试验中所有搜索项目均与客体工作记忆内容不同。实验2保持实际匹配试验概率恒定, 仅通过改变指导语来调节抑制动机水平, 以排除练习的干扰。两实验结果均表明, 当抑制动机水平较低时, 匹配分心物会捕获注意; 而当抑制动机水平足够高时, 匹配分心物会被抑制。并且, 抑制动机水平的高低还会影响认知控制的效应量和时程。     

工作记忆内容对空间返回抑制的影响

工作记忆内容能够以相对自动化的方式引导视觉选择性注意。研究的目的在于考察工作记忆内容对空间返回抑制的影响。实验一要求被试在客体工作记忆保持阶段完成返回抑制任务,结果发现无论返回抑制任务目标是否与工作记忆内容匹配都出现了返回抑制效应。实验二要求被试在空间工作记忆保持阶段完成返回抑制任务,结果发现当目标落在记忆空间上时返回抑制效应消失。因此,空间返回抑制仅会受到基于空间工作记忆的视觉注意引导的影响。     

言语记忆对视觉选择的影响:基于维度的自动注意引导

两个实验分别考察外显和内隐言语记忆中的特征维度信息对基于维度的视觉选择性注意的自动引导作用。实验一要求被试在言语工作记忆(外显言语记忆)保持阶段完成一个视觉注意任务,结果发现了显著的一致性效应,即记忆任务相关维度和注意任务相关维度不一致条件下的注意任务反应时要显著慢于两者一致条件下的反应时;实验二采用go/no-go任务以考察内隐言语记忆对视觉选择的影响,结果也发现了类似的一致性效应。这些结果表明外显和内隐言语记忆中的抽象维度信息自动引导注意选择视场中与之匹配的视觉维度,而不管该维度是否为当前注意任务的相关维度。     

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。     

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。     

基于记忆的注意捕获和注意抑制效应：ERP证据

采用工作记忆与视觉搜索双任务范式, 通过操作匹配试次出现概率来诱发不同水平的认知控制动机, 考察了基于记忆的注意引导过程的时程特点。结果：记忆匹配刺激首先诱发了N2pc成分, 随后诱发了与抑制过程相关的差异正波。并且, 认知控制动机水平越高, N2pc波幅越小、潜伏期越短; 抑制性差异正波波幅越大。结论：基于记忆的注意引导过程包括早期的注意捕获和后期的注意抑制两个阶段; 其效应量和时程受到认知控制动机水平的调节。     

The role of perceptual load in processing distractor faces

It has been established that successful ignoring of irrelevant distractors depends on the extent to which the current task loads attention. However, the previous load studies have typically employed neutral distractor stimuli (e.g., letters). In the experiments reported here, we examined whether the perception of irrelevant distractor faces would show the same effects. We manipulated attentional load in a relevant task of name search by varying the search set size and found that whereas congruency effects from meaningful nonface distractors were eliminated by higher search load, interference from distractor faces was entirely unaffected by search load. These results support the idea that face processing may be mandatory and generalize the load theory to the processing of meaningful and more complex nonface distractors.     

Entirely irrelevant distractors can capture and captivate attention

The question of whether a stimulus onset may capture attention when it is entirely irrelevant to the task and even in the absence of any attentional settings for abrupt onset or any dynamic changes has been highly controversial. In the present study, we designed a novel irrelevant capture task to address this question. Participants engaged in a continuous task making sequential forced choice (letter or digit) responses to each item in an alphanumeric matrix that remained on screen throughout many responses. This task therefore involved no attentional settings for onset or indeed any dynamic changes, yet the brief onset of an entirely irrelevant distractor (a cartoon picture) resulted in significant slowing of the two (Experiment 1) or three (Experiment 2) responses immediately following distractor appearance These findings provide a clear demonstration of attention being captured and captivated by a distractor that is entirely irrelevant to any attentional settings of the task.     

The effect of novel distractors on performance in focused attention tasks: A cognitive-psychophysiological approach

In the present study, we examined whether or not novel stimuli affect performance in a focused attention task. Participants responded to a central target while an irrelevant distractor in the visual display was occasionally changed. In Experiment 1, both target and distractor were presented centrally within the focus of attention. In Experiment 2, a central target was presented along with an irrelevant distractor at a peripheral location, outside the focus of attention. Novel distractors were associated with longer latencies and enhanced orienting responses (as measured by skin conductance responses) only when presented at an attended location. In contrast, as is demonstrated in Experiment 3, the same peripheral novel distractors interfered with task performance when they possessed task-relevant information. These results indicate that there is a fundamental difference between novel stimuli and task-relevant stimuli. Whereas the former exert influence only within the focus of attention, the latter affect performance even when positioned in an unattended location. Our findings have important implications for the operation of visual attention.     

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.     

Working memory effects in speeded RSVP tasks

The present paper examines the effects of memory contents and memory load in rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) speeded tasks, trying to explain previous inconsistent results. We used a one target (Experiment 1) and a two-target (Experiment 2) RSVP task with a concurrent memory load of one or four items, in a dual-task paradigm. A relation between material in working memory and the target in the RSVP impaired the identification of the target. In Experiments 3 and 4, the single task was to determine whether any information in memory matched the target in the RSVP, while varying the memory load. A match was detected faster than a non-match, although only when there was some distance between targets in the RSVP (Experiment 4). The results suggest that memory contents automatically capture attention, slowing processing when the memory contents are irrelevant to the task, and speeding processing when they are relevant.     

The role of working memory in attentional capture

Much previous research has demonstrated that visual search is typically disrupted by the presence of a unique “singleton” distractor in the search display. Here we show that attentional capture by an irrelevant color singleton during shape search critically depends on availability of working memory to the search task: When working memory is loaded in a concurrent yet unrelated verbal short-term memory task, capture increases. These findings converge with previous demonstrations that increasing working memory load results in greater distractor interference in Stroop-like tasks (de Fockert, Rees, Frith, & Lavie, 2001; Lavie, Hirst, de Fockert, & Viding, 2004), which support the hypothesis that working memory provides goal-directed control of visual selective attention allowing to minimize interference by goal-irrelevant distractors.