返回抑制和情绪信息注意偏向的竞争：来自眼动的证据

返回抑制与情绪注意偏向是研究视觉注意的两个视角,二者的优先性一直存在争议。本研究采用线索—靶子范式,在靶子位置呈现情绪图片,结合眼动技术,对整体反应时进行分解,探讨情绪信息与实验任务相关条件下的返回抑制和情绪注意偏向。结果发现：返回抑制效应出现;情绪信息与实验任务的相关性影响了个体对情绪信息早期的注意捕获;有效线索对情绪信息的加工抑制有限,情绪信息的加工表现出了自动化倾向。     

阈上和阈下不同情绪线索对返回抑制的影响

为检验返回抑制是否受线索生物学意义的调节, 分别在实验一和实验二中以阈上和阈下不同情绪效价(高兴、生气和中性)的面孔为外源性线索, 变化同时提示位置的多寡, 要求被试对靶子尽可能快而准地作探测反应。实验一发现, 三种线索情况下均出现返回抑制且效应量无显著差异; 实验二发现, 线索为中性面孔时出现返回抑制, 线索为高兴和生气面孔时未出现返回抑制。说明返回抑制受线索生物学意义的调节。阈下线索的生物学意义(情绪效价)能得到自动加工, 从而影响空间注意的转移和返回抑制机制的功用; 阈上线索的情绪效价被清晰感知时, 自上而下的注意控制机制使线索的生物学意义被忽略, 从而阻碍情绪效价功能的发挥。     

内隐情绪加工对返回抑制效应的调节

为探讨内隐情绪加工是否会对返回抑制产生影响,采用线索靶子范式,以情绪性面孔图片作为目标,要求被试完成定位任务。结果发现,行为数据和脑电数据均显示了显著的返回抑制效应;N1成分上情绪效价和线索有效性的主效应及交互作用均显著,有效线索条件下情绪目标诱发的波幅显著大于中性目标;N170成分上线索有效性主效应显著,相较于N1成分,N170成分在有效线索上波幅更小,在无效线索上波幅更大。实验结果表明返回抑制效应受到内隐情绪加工的调节,提示该效应来源于早期的知觉抑制,支持知觉抑制理论。     

自我威胁刺激对返回抑制的影响

使用线索-靶子范式,分别将面孔刺激作为线索(实验1)和靶子(实验2)呈现,考察自我扭曲面孔对返回抑制的影响。结果发现:自我扭曲面孔为线索时,与他人扭曲、他人中性面孔产生了实验性分离,自我扭曲面孔的返回抑制效应量最小;自我扭曲面孔为靶子时,返回抑制消失。研究结果揭示:以自我扭曲面孔为代表的自我威胁刺激激活了威胁性自我概念,缩小了注意搜索范围,可能是导致人际紧张的潜在自我认知机制。     

抑郁个体对情绪面孔的返回抑制能力不足

探讨抑郁对情绪面孔返回抑制能力的影响。以贝克抑郁量表、自评抑郁量表、CCMD-3和汉密顿抑郁量表为工具筛选出了正常对照组、抑郁康复组和抑郁患者组各17名被试进行了真人情绪面孔线索-靶子任务的行为学实验和事件相关电位(ERP)实验。在线索靶子范式中, 靶子在线索消失后出现, 被试对靶子的位置作出反应。行为学实验显示线索靶子间隔时间(stimulus onset asynchronies, SOA)为14ms时, 正常对照组对中性面孔有返回抑制效应, 抑郁康复组对所有面孔均存在返回抑制效应, 患者组对愤怒、悲伤面孔和中性面孔存在返回抑制效应; SOA为250ms时三组被试均对悲伤面孔存在返回抑制能力不足, 以患者组最突出, 康复组对高兴面孔存在返回抑制能力不足; SOA为750ms时正常组对悲伤面孔存在返回抑制效应, 康复组对高兴和悲伤面孔存在返回抑制能力不足, 患者组对悲伤面孔存在返回抑制能力不足, 对愤怒面孔存在返回抑制效应。在SOA为750ms的条件下, ERP波形特点为正常组对高兴面孔线索P3波幅大于其他组, 对高兴面孔无效提示P1波幅小于其他面孔, 对悲伤面孔有效提示P1波幅小于高兴面孔, 对高兴面孔有效提示P3波幅大于患者组, 对悲伤面孔无效提示P3波幅大于其他组; 康复组对悲伤面孔线索P3波幅大于其他面孔, 对高兴面孔有效提示P3波幅大于患者组, 对悲伤面孔无效提示P3波幅小于正常组; 患者组对悲伤面孔线索P1波幅大于其他组、P3波幅大于其他面孔, 对悲伤面孔无效提示P3波幅小于正常组, 高兴面孔有效提示P3波幅小于其他组。提示抑郁患者对负性刺激有返回抑制能力不足, 这种对负性刺激抑制能力的缺失导致抑郁个体难以抗拒负性事件的干扰而受到不良情绪状态的困扰, 所以他们可能更多的体验到抑郁情绪, 并致使抑郁持续和发展。而抑郁康复个体对高兴、悲伤面孔均有返回抑制能力不足, 这让康复个体能同时感受到正、负性刺激, 从而能保持一种认知和情绪上特定的平衡。     

自我面孔对返回抑制的影响:来自指数高斯分布的证据

采用线索—靶子范式及指数高斯分布拟合技术,观测自我面孔对返回抑制的调节作用。平均反应时结果显示,与他人面孔相比,自我面孔作为线索也出现了返回抑制,但抑制量明显下降。表明自我面孔对返回抑制有一定调节作用。指数高斯分布拟合结果显示,返回抑制的线索化效应体现在高斯参数上,自我面孔的调节效应体现在指数参数上。提示返回抑制在知觉层面会比较稳定地发生;自我面孔可能主要通过影响个体对靶子的反应决策阈限实现调节。     

面孔性别辨认中返回抑制效应的性别差异

采用线索-靶子实验范式, 要求被试完成面孔性别辨认任务, 从注意定向方面探讨面孔性别靶刺激返回抑制效应的性别差异。结果显示有效线索位置上面孔性别靶刺激的反应时均显著长于无效线索位置上的面孔性别靶刺激的反应时, 即表现出明显的返回抑制效应。进一步分析显示, 男性被试对同性和异性面孔靶刺激的返回抑制量无显著差异, 表明男性对面孔刺激的返回抑制不受面孔性别的影响; 而卵泡期女性对异性面孔靶刺激的返回抑制量显著小于黄体期女性, 表明女性对面孔靶刺激的返回抑制量与面孔性别和生理周期的交互作用有关。这些结果再一次为返回抑制的盲目机制提供了部分实验证据, 同时我们推测面孔性别对返回抑制的影响可能依赖于观察者对性信息的敏感性。     

重复线索化和靶子注意定向对返回抑制的影响

在返回抑制范式下 ,利用线索—靶子模式进行了两个实验 ,以大学生为被试 ,以重复线索化次数来操纵线索化阶段的注意 ,以靶子的注意定向来操纵靶子加工阶段的注意 ,探讨注意对返回抑制的影响。实验一采用连续线索化方式 ,发现当靶子为自主性注意定向时 ,线索化次数对返回抑制有显著影响 ,线索化 3次时返回抑制值大于线索化 1次和 2次 ;当靶子为反射性注意定向时 ,线索化次数对返回抑制无影响。实验二采用交叉线索化方式 ,发现线索化次数对返回抑制的影响正好与实验一相反。两个实验一致表明 ,无论是线索化阶段的注意 ,还是靶子加工阶段的注意 ,均对返回抑制有显著影响 ;并且 ,在对返回抑制的影响上 ,二者存在显著交互作用。从而支持注意影响返回抑制的观点。该结果对返回抑制的机制研究有一定意义。     

面孔方位对返回抑制的影响

采用辨别任务探讨了正立与倒立的中性面孔线索对返回抑制的影响。实验一采用同时线索化范式考察了正立与倒立面孔线索对靶刺激反应的影响,结果发现,两种面孔线索对随后靶刺激的反应没有影响。实验二采用单线索范式考察正立与倒立面孔对返回抑制的影响,结果发现,两种线索条件下均产生了返回抑制,而且返回抑制量没有显著差异。实验三,正立与倒立面孔作为靶刺激呈现,得到与实验二相同的结果。这些结果表明当采用中性面孔为线索时,返回抑制的产生并不受线索与靶刺激显著性的影响,而且返回抑制这种盲目机制不受任务难度的影响。     

任务难度对基于位置返回抑制时间进程的影响

在返回抑制的实验范式下,采用线索一靶子模式进行了视觉字母觉察实验、实验发现,返回抑制在线索与靶子之间的时间间隔（ＳＯＡ）为７００ｍｓ时出现,且在９００ｍｓ时消退。这与先前许多实验发现的返回抑制在ＳＯＡ为３００ｍｓ左右时出现的结果不一致。作者认为,实验任务的难度是影响返回抑制时间进程的一个重要因素。     

Attentional Bias for Threat: Evidence for Delayed Disengagement from Emotional Faces

The present paper reports three new experiments suggesting that the valence of a face cue can influence attentional effects in a cueing paradigm. Moreover, heightened trait anxiety resulted in increased attentional dwell-time on emotional facial stimuli, relative to neutral faces. Experiment 1 presented a cueing task, in which the cue was either an "angry", "happy", or "neutral" facial expression. Targets could appear either in the same location as the face (valid trials) or in a different location to the face (invalid trials). Participants did not show significant variations across the different cue types (angry, happy, neutral) in responding to a target on valid trials. However, the valence of the face did affect response times on invalid trials. Specifically, participants took longer to respond to a target when the face cue was "angry" or "happy" relative to neutral. In Experiment 2, the cue-target stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) was increased and an overall inhibition of return (IOR) effect was found (i.e., slower responses on valid trials). However, the "angry" face cue eliminated the IOR effect for both high and low trait anxious groups. In Experiment 3, threat-related and jumbled facial stimuli reduced the magnitude of IOR for high, but not for low, trait-anxious participants.These results suggest that: (i) attentional bias in anxiety may reflect a difficulty in disengaging from threat-related and emotional stimuli, and (ii) threat-related and ambiguous cues can influence the magnitude of the IOR effect.     

Effects of spatial cues on locating emotional targets

Inhibition of return (IOR) refers to slower responding to a visual target appearing at a previously cued versus uncued location. In three experiments, we asked whether IOR would be affected by the emotional content of target stimuli. Participants reported the location of negative (spiders, angry faces) or neutral (objects, neutral faces) targets as quickly and accurately as possible after a valid or invalid location cue (a simple circle). IOR was significantly smaller when detecting negative versus neutral targets, but only after repeated exposures to these stimuli (i.e., with blocked presentations). This effect was eliminated when target type was randomized within blocks. By presenting negative versus neutral targets in short alternating blocks and examining IOR on the first trial of each new block, we show that the emotional modulation of IOR stems from the affective context in place before visual orienting is initiated, not by perceptual processing of the target after cue offset.     

返回抑制过程中情绪面孔加工优先：ERPs研究

返回抑制(IOR)是指注意过程中个体对已搜索过的位置进行抑制, 从而在随后该位置上出现目标时发生注意重新定向或反应变慢的过程。本研究使用ERPs技术, 采用线索-靶子范式, 考察了情绪目标辨别任务中IOR的发生过程及二者的神经机制。结果发现, 与无效线索相比, 有效线索下的P1波幅更小, N1波幅更大, 正性、负性面孔N170的波幅比中性面孔大。表明当要求被试做情绪辨别任务时, IOR与对情绪信息的反应之间发生了分离, 表现出情绪加工的优先。这说明IOR和情绪偏向是发生在两种不同神经通路上的适应机制, 也为进一步探究注意与情绪的关系问题提供了来自神经电生理学的证据。     

Inhibition of return for faces

Inhibition of return (IOR) refers to slower reaction times when a target appears unpredictably in the same location as a preceding cue, rather than in a different location. In the present study, frontal images of human faces were presented intact as face configurations, were rearranged to produce scrambled-face configurations, or were pixilated and randomized to produce nonface configurations. In an orienting paradigm designed to elicit IOR, face and scrambled-face stimuli were used as cues (Experiment 1), as targets (Experiment 2), or along with pixilated nonface stimuli as both cues and targets (Experiment 3). The magnitude of IOR for subsequent localization targets was unaffected by cue configuration. Likewise, the magnitude of IOR was unaffected by target configuration. These results suggest that IOR is a "blind" mechanism that is unaffected by the mere occurrence of biologically relevant cue and target stimuli.     

Inhibition of return is unimpressed by emotional cues

Inhibition of return (IOR) is a phenomenon observed when a target unexpectedly appears in the place of a preceding cue: With long cue–target stimulus onset asynchronies, reaction times are longer than for targets that appear in an alternative location. Cognitive theories of anxiety suppose that the IOR effect diminishes with threatening, biologically relevant cues because these catch and hold attention. To test this hypothesis, we conducted three experiments, in which emotional valence of cues (animals or facial expressions) had no influence on the strength of the IOR effect, neither in an unselected sample of students nor in highly spider-fearful or socially anxious participants. Inhibition of return appears to be a robust effect, blind to cue valence.     

Interpreting neutral faces as threatening is a default mode for socially anxious individuals

The authors of the present study used an incidental learning paradigm to investigate the interpretation of neutral facial expressions in socially anxious individuals. Participants were asked to detect the location of a target following the presentation of a facial picture (i.e., cue). Unbeknownst to participants, the target location was contingent on the valence of the cue, and participants thus learned to associate different target locations with either positive or negative facial expressions. The authors subsequently used this learned association to assess interpretive biases. If socially anxious individuals interpret neutral faces in a negative manner, they should be faster to detect a target that appears in the location that is associated with negative face cues when the target is presented after a neutral face cue. The authors also assessed whether the anticipation of a feared situation influenced interpretive biases by comparing participants with and without a speech threat on this task. Results indicate that socially anxious individuals are characterized by an interpretive bias regardless of the threat manipulation. In contrast, nonanxious individuals interpreted neutral faces in a negative manner only when they were in the threat condition.     

Modulation of inhibition of return by type and number of dynamic changes of the cue

Inhibition of return (IOR) is a response delay when the target is preceded by an irrelevant stimulus (cue) at the same location. In a previous study, we investigated the separate and joint effects on IOR of cue onset and offset. IOR was much greater when cue onset was followed by cue offset (on-off cue) than when the cue was a single event (on or off cues). The aim of the present study was to test whether the greater IOR with an on-off cue is due to the presence of two cue events. Three experiments were conducted. In Experiment 1 we replicated, with a different delay between cue onset and offset, the finding that IOR is greater with an on-off cue than with a single cue event. In Experiments 2 and 3, we used cues formed by two events. In Experiment 2, an on-off cue was compared with an off-on cue, whereas in Experiment 3 an on-on cue was compared with an off-off cue. Results showed that the magnitude of IOR did not simply depend on the number of cue events occurring before the target. IOR was greater with two different events than with two identical events and greater when was preceded by an off-event than an on-event. Therefore, IOR was greatest with an on-off cue, which likely also benefited from a gap effect. Possible mechanisms underlying IOR were discussed. Received: 31 March 1999 / Accepted: 23 July 1999     

过犹不及：情绪的效价-唤醒度冲突在动机倾向上的分离

本研究通过两个实验考察不同效价度和唤醒度的情绪刺激是否存在动机倾向上的分离模式。实验1要求被试对表情图片的动机倾向（趋近/回避）进行主观评分,发现被试对低唤醒表情或积极表情有更加趋近的倾向。实验2以运动的线索启动动机倾向（趋近/回避）,完成情绪词效价判断任务,从内隐的角度考察情绪刺激是否存在动机倾向上的分离模式,结果发现,被试对动机倾向一致的情绪刺激的反应时更快。趋近的消极情绪词比趋近的积极情绪词的N2波幅更大,远离的低唤醒情绪词比趋近的低唤醒情绪词的LPC波幅更大。结果说明积极或者低唤醒的情绪刺激引发趋近倾向,而消极或高唤醒的情绪刺激引发回避倾向。