跨视听通道的错误记忆ERP新旧效应研究

Smith和Hunt于1998年首次采用DRM范式提出了错误记忆通道效应,即视觉学习通道较之听觉学习通道会降低错误再认或错误回忆,这不仅引发了一系列关于错误记忆通道效应的研究,而且提出了许多关于错误记忆通道效应产生机制的不同观点。本实验采用DRM范式,运用ERP技术,考察了视觉与听觉通道在提取阶段的错误记忆新旧效应,以从更深层面认识错误记忆的内在加工机制。结果发现,视觉与听觉通道在300-500ms和500-700ms两个时间窗都发现了ERP新旧效应,但在脑区位置以及错误记忆的新旧效应方面存在差异,这表明视觉通道与听觉通道在提取阶段的新旧效应存在不同的脑神经活动,不同学习通道在提取阶段的监测加工差异在导致错误记忆通道效应方面起着非常重要的作用。     

重复学习对错误记忆通道效应的影响

本研究采用DRM范式以80名大学生为被试对错误记忆的通道效应进行了研究.实验采用三因素混合设计,运用信号检测论等方法探讨了重复学习对不同通道错误再认的影响.结果发现:1)汉语词表具有与英文词表不同的通道效应,表现为视觉学习的错误再认高于听觉学习;2)重复学习对视觉学习与听觉学习的错误再认产生分离性影响,即重复学习降低了视觉学习的错误再认,却提高了听觉学习的错误再认;3)信号检测论的分析表明:听觉学习在重复学习后对关键诱词的错误再认的增加是听觉学习对要义信息日益增加的敏感性连同较为宽松的提取标准协同起作用的结果.     

正确记忆与错误记忆中的感觉通道效应研究

本研究采用DRM范式,考察了正确记忆与错误记忆中的感觉通道效应,以及干扰因素对正确记忆与错误记忆的影响.结果表明:(1)无论是正确记忆还是错误记忆,视觉呈现优于听觉呈现;(2)三种呈现通道下.对关键诱饵的错误记忆差异不显著;(3)干扰任务下的再认成绩比无干扰任务下的再认成绩好.结合实验结果,本文还就不同通道下错误记忆的加工机制问题以及正确记忆与错误记忆的关系问题进行了初探.     

通道匹配和加工水平对DRM范式错误记忆的影响

本研究采用2×2×2被试间设计,分别对视觉或听觉通道呈现的DRM词表进行了高水平或低水平的加工,此后又在视觉或听觉通道上,进行了针对DRM词表旧有项目、关键诱饵和无关项目的再认测验。实验证明了DRM范式中错误记忆的稳定存在,并且错误记忆受通道变换和加工水平变化的影响。通道不匹配时的错误记忆效应要大于二者匹配时的;通道匹配时,视觉呈现所导致的错误记忆效应要大于听觉呈现的;通道不匹配时,由听觉学习转到视觉测验时所导致的错误记忆效应要大于由视觉学习转到听觉测验时的。实验表明通道效应和加工水平效应是相互作用的。     

非熟练中-英双语者跨语言的错误记忆通道效应

采用DRM范式以112名非熟练中-英双语者为被试进行了跨语言的错误记忆通道效应实验。实验采用三因素混合设计,根据学习通道和测验通道的不同,把被试分为4组,用由汉语与英语单词组成的DRM词表进行学习和测验。结果发现,⑴在非熟练中-英双语被试中存在错误记忆的跨语言现象;⑵非熟练中-英双语者跨语言的错误记忆存在很强的语言特异性,表现为相同语言条件高于不同语言条件、汉语高于英语;⑶在学习与测验相同语言条件下运用校正的再认分数——敏感性指标Pr,进一步探讨错误记忆的通道效应,发现了跟西方不一致的结论：即无论汉语词表还是英语词表,非熟练中-英双语者在视觉通道上的错误记忆明显高于听觉通道     

错误记忆的来源：编码阶段／保持阶段

错误记忆是人们对未经验过事件或未学过单词的记忆。研究表明,不同实验室研究范式下引发的错误记忆在来源阶段上存在差异。本研究通过同时操纵预警提示和时间间隔两个因素来探讨错误记忆的来源问题。结果发现:关联性错误记忆出现预警效应,但不具有时间效应;误导性错误记忆则恰好相反。可见,关联性错误记忆可能主要发生在编码阶段,而误导性错误记忆则可能主要发生在保持阶段。     

时序信息加工机制及其通道效应的实验研究

研究由两个实验组成,实验一采用纯粹的视听方式,以线段长度和声音频率为材料,对时序信息的加工方式（自动加工与控制加工）、编码特点（时序信息是何时编码的）以及通道效应进行了研究。实验二以汉字为材料重复实验一的过程;结果表明,时序信息的加工存在视听通道效应,其机制源于记忆,且与实验材料的加工深度以及加工方式有关;时序信息既包含有自动加工,又包含有控制加工。视觉刺激倾向于自动加工,而听觉则倾向于控制加工;时序信息是在项目学习时编码获得的,而不是在提取时建构的。     

12-13岁儿童数字编码与提取的ERP研究

采用学习与再认测验范式,研究儿童数字编码与提取的神经机制。18名12-13岁儿童作为研究被试,要求在测验阶段对数字是否学过进行判断,并记录编码与提取阶段的ERPs,然后考察旧数字是否成功提取在编码阶段形成相应的相继记忆(Dm)效应,同时,考察正确判断的旧数字和新数字在提取阶段形成相应的旧/新(old/new)效应。结果表明,编码阶段,Dm效应出现在400-700ms的枕区、顶区和中央区,正确再认数字的正波波幅明显大于再认错误数字的正波波幅;提取阶段,在400-500ms,枕区和顶区存在显著的old/new效应,在500-700 ms内的顶区和中央区存在显著的old/new效应,尤以中央区为主,正确再认旧数字的正波波幅明显大于正确再认新数字的正波波幅。这些结果说明,认知数字与面孔、图片的Dm效应和old/new效应在时、空均有所不同。     

生存加工的编码和提取双重优势效应:ERP证据

生存加工比控制条件有更好的记忆表现,产生稳定的记忆优势,这就是记忆生存优势.已有研究多采用行为学实验验证了此现象的存在,但没有确定该优势发生在记忆的何种阶段.本研究采用ERP技术和“间接学习-再认”实验范式,比较被试在生存情境、迁徙情境和愉悦判断中对词汇编码和提取过程的记忆加工,结果发现:在500-700ms时间段,生存情境的相继记忆效应显著大于迁徙情境和愉悦判断:在400-600ms时间段,生存情境的新旧效应显著大于迁徙情境和愉悦判断.表明生存加工具有编码和提取双重优势.     

预警和呈现时间对错误再认和错误回忆的影响

采用DRM范式,通过两个实验探讨了学习阶段的预警和词表呈现时间对错误再认与错误回忆的影响异同以及其发生作用的可能条件.采用视觉-视觉通道的学习-测验模式,实验1使用再认测验,结果发现呈现时间对错误再认不存在影响,而预警提示有效地降低了错误再认;实验2使用回忆测验,依然没有发现呈现时间对错误回忆的影响效应,预警的效应也消失.以上结果表明:(1)预警对错误回忆的影响受到编码时呈现通道的影响,视觉编码条件下预警效果甚微,而错误再认则无此通道效应;(2)呈现时间的较大变化可同时促进激活与监测过程,错误记忆效应的大小是激活与监测双加工过程此消彼长的交互作用结果.     

Modality effect in false recognition: evidence from Chinese characters

Using the Deese/Roediger‐McDermott (DRM) false memory method, Smith and Hunt ( 1998 ) first reported the modality effect on false memory and showed that false recall from DRM lists was lower following visual study than following auditory study, which led to numerous studies on the mechanism of modality effect on false memory and provided many competing explanations. In the present experiment, the authors tested the modality effect in false recognition by using a blocked presentation condition and a random presentation condition. The present experiment found a modality effect different from the results of the previous research; namely, false recognition was shown to be greater following visual study than following auditory study, especially in the blocked presentation condition rather than in the random presentation condition. The authors argued that this reversed modality effect may be due to different encoding and processing characteristics between Chinese characters and English words. Compared with English words, visual graphemes of critical lures in Chinese lists are likely to be activated and encoded in participants' minds, thus it is more difficult for participants to discriminate later inner graphemes from those items presented in visual modality. Hence visual presentation could lead to more false recognition than auditory presentation in Chinese lists. The results in the present experiment demonstrated that semantic activation occurring during the encoding and retrieve phases played an important role in modality effect in false recognition, and our findings might be explained by the activation‐monitoring account.     

Eye-closure & the retrieval of item-specific information in recognition memory

Two experiments investigated the effect of eye-closure on visual and auditory memory under conditions based on the retrieval of item-specific information. Experiment 1 investigated visual recognition memory for studied, perceptually similar and unrelated items. It was found that intermittent eye-closure increased memory for studied items and decreased memory for related items. This finding was reflected by enhanced item-specific and reduced gist memory. Experiment 2 used the Deese-Roediger-McDermott (DRM) paradigm to assess auditory recognition memory for studied, related and unrelated words that had (vs. had not) been accompanied by pictures during encoding. Pictures but not eye-closure produced a picture superiority effect by enhancing memory for studied items. False memory was reduced by pictures but not eye-closure. Methodological and theoretical considerations are discussed in relation to existing explanations of eye-closure and retrieval strategies.     

Cross-modality translations improve recognition by reducing false alarms

Conway and Gathercole [(1990). Writing and long-term memory: Evidence for a “translation” hypothesis. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 42, 513–527] proposed a translation account to explain why certain types of encoding produce benefits in memory: Switching modalities from what is presented to what is encoded enhances item distinctiveness. We investigated this hypothesis in a recognition experiment in which the presentation modality of a study list (visual vs. auditory) and the encoding activity (speaking vs. typing vs. passive encoding) were manipulated between-subjects. Manipulating encoding activity between-subjects ruled out any potential influence of the relationally distinct processing that can occur in a within-subject manipulation (in which all previous translation effects have been demonstrated). We found no overall difference in memory for words presented auditorily vs. visually nor for visual vs. auditory encoding, but critically presentation modality and encoding activity did interact. Translating from one modality to another – particularly from auditory presentation to visual encoding (typing) – led to the best memory discrimination. This was largely because of reduced false alarms, not increased hits, consistent with the distinctiveness heuristic.     

强大的错误记忆效应:词表呈现时间与呈现方式的影响

本研究采用DRM范式(Deese-Roediger-McDermott paradigm),考察了词表项目的呈现时间与呈现方式对错误记忆效应的影响。结果发现,被试对关键诱饵的错误再认受到学习阶段词表项目的呈现方式的影响,表现为所有项目随机呈现条件下的错误再认明显低于分组呈现条件,尤其是在20ms的随机呈现条件下,观察到了对关键诱饵的最低错误再认率。说明在对词表项目的编码阶段产生了对关键诱饵的连续激活,而对关键诱饵的错误记忆则是基于连续激活的不断累积的结果,当词表项目的随机呈现阻断了连续激活过程时,便会有效降低错误记忆效应。而且,在所有实验条件下均发现了错误记忆效应产生中所伴随的强烈主观体验,证实了错误记忆是一种强大的效应。     

Paradoxical effects of presentation modality on false memory.

Two experiments are reported in which the effects of presentation modality on false memory in recall and recognition are studied. False recall and recognition of critical targets are lower for non-presented items related to a study list when that study list is presented visually than when presented auditorily. This pattern of low levels of false memory for critical targets holds even when participants read the visually presented study items aloud. These results suggest that recollection of visual detail plays a role in the prevention of false memory. However, both the hit rates (true memory) and the false-alarm rates to weakly related distractors (non-critical targets) were higher for visual presentation than for auditory presentation, suggesting that more than one mechanism may underlie false recognition.     

False memory across languages: implicit associative response vs fuzzy trace views

We investigated false recognition across languages using the Deese-Roediger-McDermott (DRM) paradigm. A group of English-French bilinguals studied lists of converging associates, some lists in English and some in French, and then performed a recognition test containing studied list items and nonstudied critical lures whose language matched or mismatched the language at study. Participants were instructed to answer old only if the test cue was in the same language as the studied word. The results yielded a robust false memory rate both within-language and across-languages. The effect of the study-test language shift was much larger for list items than for critical lures. This finding suggests that memory representations for critical lures contain primarily semantic gist traces and little surface information, and hence is more consistent with the fuzzy trace view than with the implicit associative response view. In sum, the study demonstrates the existence of false memory across languages, and provides information about the memory traces underlying veridical and illusory recognition.     

The modality effect in false recognition: Evidence for test-based monitoring

False recognition in the Deese/Roediger-McDermott (DRM) paradigm has been shown to be greater following auditory study than following visual study, but there are competing explanations for this effect. We generalized this phenomenon in Experiment 1, finding an equivalent modality effect for associative (DRM) lists and categorized lists. Because conscious generationand subsequent monitoring of related lures during study is infrequent for categorized lists, this result is inconsistent with the idea that the modality effect is due to a study-based monitoring process. An alternative explanation is that visual study impairs relational processing relative to auditory study, which could cause a modality effect by lowering false recognition of related lures. We tested this idea in Experiment 2, by switching to a meaning-based test that is sensitive only to the retrieval of relational information. A modality effect was not obtained for either type of list on this test. The results from both experiments were predicted by a test-based monitoring account, rather than by the study-based monitoring or relational processing accounts.     

Modality effects in delayed free recall and recognition: Visual is better than auditory

During presentation of auditory and visual lists of words, different groups of subjects generated words that either rhymed with the presented words or that were associates. Immediately after list presentation, subjects recalled either the presented or the generated words. After presentation and test of all lists, a final free recall test and a recognition test were given. Visual presentation generally produced higher recall and recognition than did auditory presentation for both encoding conditions. The results are not consistent with explanations of modality effects in terms of echoic memory or greater temporal distinctiveness of auditory items. The results are more in line with the separate-streams hypothesis, which argues for different kinds of input processing for auditory and visual items.