空间工作记忆负载对真实场景情境提示效应的影响

重复的画面布局能够促进观察者对目标项的搜索 (情境提示效应)。本研究采用双任务范式,分别在视觉搜索任务的学习阶段 (实验2a) 和测验阶段 (实验2b) 加入空间工作记忆任务, 并与单任务基线 (实验1)进行比较, 考察空间工作记忆负载对真实场景搜索中情境线索学习和情境提示效应表达的影响。结果发现: 空间负载会增大学习阶段的情境提示效应量, 同时削弱测验阶段的情境提示效应量, 而不影响情境线索的外显提取。由此可见, 真实场景中情境线索的学习和提示效应的表达均会受到有限的工作记忆资源的影响, 但情境线索提取的外显性不变。     

场景情境和目标模板在视觉搜索中的交互作用

以真实场景图像中的物体搜索为实验任务, 操纵场景情境和目标模板, 采用眼动技术将搜索过程分为起始阶段、扫描阶段和确认阶段, 考察场景情境和目标模板对视觉搜索过程的影响机制。结果发现, 场景情境和目标模板的作用方式及时间点不同, 二者交互影响搜索的正确率和反应时, 仅场景情境影响起始阶段的时间, 随后二者交互影响扫描阶段和确认阶段的时间及主要眼动指标。作者由此提出了场景情境和目标模板在视觉搜索中的交互作用模型。     

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。     

视觉工作记忆负载类型对注意选择的影响

通过操纵Flanker任务相对于视觉工作记忆任务的呈现位置, 探讨在视觉工作记忆编码和保持阶段, 精度负载和容量负载对注意选择的影响。行为结果发现, Flanker任务呈现位置和视觉工作记忆负载类型影响注意选择; ERP结果发现, 在保持阶段, 当搜索目标和干扰项不一致时, 负载类型影响N2成分。研究表明, 在编码阶段, 视觉工作记忆负载主要通过占用更多知觉资源降低干扰效应, 支持知觉负载理论; 而在保持阶段, 当Flanker任务位于记忆项内部时, 两类负载在工作记忆表征过程中不同的神经活动导致投入到注意选择的认知控制资源不同, 可能是两类负载影响保持阶段注意选择的机制。     

视空工作记忆负载对场景主旨加工的影响

本研究采用工作记忆任务和场景辨别任务相结合的双任务范式探究客体工作记忆负载 (实验1)和空间工作记忆负载 (实验2) 对场景主旨辨别的影响。结果发现: (1) 与无负载条件相比, 客体负载条件下的非参辨别力指数(A’)明显下降, 而空间负载条件下A’无明显变化; (2) 随着场景图片呈现时间的延长, 场景辨别任务的A’逐渐提高; (3) 对自然场景和人工场景匹配情况下的A’ 明显高于对自然与自然或者人工与人工匹配情况下的A’。由此可见, 场景主旨识别, 特别是基本水平的场景主旨辨别, 与客体工作记忆共享部分认知资源, 而不与/很少与空间工作记忆共享认知资源; 在识别过程中, 上级水平范畴识别优先于基本水平范畴识别, 进一步支持了上级水平范畴优先的主旨层级加工观点。     

不同注意对视觉工作记忆外部特征绑定的影响

采用变化觉察范式,在工作记忆保持阶段插入客体特征辨别或视觉搜索次任务,探讨基于客体的注意和基于空间的注意对视觉工作记忆外部特征绑定表征的影响。结果发现,与单特征相比,两类次任务均对外部特征绑定的记忆成绩损耗更大。这表明视觉工作记忆中外部特征绑定的表征比单特征消耗更多基于客体的注意和更多基于空间的注意。     

真实物体搜索中的视角依赖效应:来自眼动的证据

已有研究发现物体识别存在视角依赖效应,那么在真实物体搜索中是否也存在视角依赖效应呢?本研究采用物体阵列搜索任务,通过眼动技术探讨真实物体搜索中的视角依赖效应及其来源。结果发现:(1)图片提示的搜索绩效优于名称提示;(2)以名称提示时,常规视角的搜索绩效高于新异视角,与新异视角相比,以常规视角呈现的目标物体在扫描和确认阶段的注视点数较少且持续时间较短,表现出视角依赖效应;(3)以图片为提示时,搜索绩效与视角无关。由此可见,在以名称提示的物体搜索中,常规视角比新异视角条件下的注意引导更高效,对目标物体的确认也更快,扫描和确认阶段均存在视角依赖效应,支持目标模板的双功能理论。     

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。     

视觉工作记忆影响言语工作记忆吗?

实验1、2采用双任务范式分别考察了视觉客体工作记忆、视觉空间工作记忆对言语工作记忆的影响。结果均发现,两种视觉记忆负载条件下的汉字回忆成绩没有差异。这表明,视觉工作记忆不影响同时进行的言语工作记忆任务的完成。     

客体相似性对不同认知方式个体视觉工作记忆表征的影响

采用整体检测的变化察觉范式,探讨客体的相似性对客体—空间型认知方式个体视觉工作记忆表征的影响。行为结果显示,在不相似客体的视觉工作记忆表征任务中,客体型者在长延时条件的成绩优于空间型者,而在相似客体的视觉工作记忆表征任务中,两者无差异;ERP结果显示,在不相似客体视觉工作记忆表征任务中,与客体型者相比,空间型者在大脑皮层诱发出更大的负SP。以上结果表明,客体型者比空间型者对不相似客体视觉工作记忆加工具有优势,其潜在机制可能在于,客体型者对不相似客体视觉工作记忆表征时的神经活动效能更高。     

Visual search is slowed when visuospatial working memory is occupied

Visual working memory plays a central role in most models of visual search. However, a recent study showed that search efficiency was not impaired when working memory was filled to capacity by a concurrent object memory task (Woodman, Vogel, & Luck, 2001). Objects and locations may be stored in separate working memory subsystems, and it is plausible that visual search relies on the spatial subsystem, but not on the object subsystem. In the present study, we sought to determine whether maintaining spatial information in visual working memory impairs the efficiency of a concurrent visual search task. Visual search efficiency and spatial memory accuracy were both impaired when the search and the memory tasks were performed concurrently, as compared with when the tasks were performed separately. These findings suggest that common mechanisms are used to process information during difficult visual search tasks and to maintain spatial information in working memory.     

Visual working memory load disrupts the space‐based attentional guidance of target selection

During visual search, the selection of target objects is guided by stored representations of target‐defining features (attentional templates). It is commonly believed that such templates are maintained in visual working memory (WM), but empirical evidence for this assumption remains inconclusive. Here, we tested whether retaining non‐spatial object features (shapes) in WM interferes with attentional target selection processes in a concurrent search task that required spatial templates for target locations. Participants memorized one shape (low WM load) or four shapes (high WM load) in a sample display during a retention period. On some trials, they matched them to a subsequent memory test display. On other trials, a search display including two lateral bars in the upper or lower visual field was presented instead, and participants reported the orientation of target bars that were defined by their location (e.g., upper left or lower right). To assess the efficiency of attentional control under low and high WM load, EEG was recorded and the N2pc was measured as a marker of attentional target selection. Target N2pc components were strongly delayed when concurrent WM load was high, indicating that holding multiple object shapes in WM competes with the simultaneous retention of spatial attentional templates for target locations. These observations provide new electrophysiological evidence that such templates are maintained in WM, and also challenge suggestions that spatial and non‐spatial contents are represented in separate independent visual WM stores.     

重新检视工作记忆在视觉搜索中的作用

视觉搜索是人类从作用于视觉系统的大量信息中选择相关信息进入信息加工系统的一种认知功能, 同时也是研究选择性注意的一种常用范式。工作记忆作为一种服务于当前任务信息的存储与加工的认知系统, 在视觉搜索过程中扮演着关键角色。为了深入了解工作记忆在视觉搜索过程中的作用机制, 在梳理已有成果的基础上, 分别从工作记忆对靶子模板的储存、视觉搜索项目与靶子模板在工作记忆中的匹配及工作记忆对已检测过搜索项目的记忆三个方面进行综述。最后结论表明工作记忆确实在视觉搜索过程中起作用, 但其作用机制仍存在较多争议。     

现实场景典型空间位置关系客体的解码效应

通过探讨典型空间关系客体对中单个客体的视觉工作记忆,考察空间位置关系的解码特征和主动客体记忆优势。结果发现：（1）当客体以符合空间位置关系方式呈现时,记忆更准确;（2）符合空间位置关系条件下单个客体提取反应时更长,上方客体反应时更短,记忆更准确;（3）兼具空间位置关系与动作关系客体对中的主动客体记忆正确率更高。结果表明,现实场景客体空间分组中单个客体提取时存在解码现象和顺序效应,对现实中的上方与主动客体存在加工偏好。     

The role of spatial working memory in visual search efficiency

Many theories have proposed that visual working memory plays an important role in visual search. In contrast, by showing that a nonspatial working memory load did not interfere with search efficiency, Woodman, Vogel, and Luck (2001) recently proposed that the role of working memory in visual search is insignificant. However, the visual search process may interfere with spatial working memory. In the present study, a visual search task was performed concurrently with either a spatial working memory task (Experiment 1) or a nonspatial working memory task (Experiment 2). We found that the visual search process interfered with a spatial working memory load, but not with a nonspatial working memory load. These results suggest that there is a distinction between spatial and nonspatial working memory in terms of interactions with visual search tasks. These results imply that the visual search process and spatial working memory storage require the same limited-capacity mechanisms.     

Learning in repeated visual search

Visual search (e.g., finding a specific object in an array of other objects) is performed most effectively when people are able to ignore distracting nontargets. In repeated search, however, incidental learning of object identities may facilitate performance. In three experiments, with over 1,100 participants, we examined the extent to which search could be facilitated by object memory and by memory for spatial layouts. Participants searched for new targets (real-world, nameable objects) embedded among repeated distractors. To make the task more challenging, some participants performed search for multiple targets, increasing demands on visual working memory (WM). Following search, memory for search distractors was assessed using a surprise two-alternative forced choice recognition memory test with semantically matched foils. Search performance was facilitated by distractor object learning and by spatial memory; it was most robust when object identity was consistently tied to spatial locations and weakest (or absent) when object identities were inconsistent across trials. Incidental memory for distractors was better among participants who searched under high WM load, relative to low WM load. These results were observed when visual search included exhaustive-search trials (Experiment 1) or when all trials were self-terminating (Experiment 2). In Experiment 3, stimulus exposure was equated across WM load groups by presenting objects in a single-object stream; recognition accuracy was similar to that in Experiments 1 and 2. Together, the results suggest that people incidentally generate memory for nontarget objects encountered during search and that such memory can facilitate search performance.