面孔表情及注视方向对面孔加工特异性的影响——基于知觉负荷理论的视角

知觉负荷理论认为,当前任务知觉负荷的高低决定了选择性注意过程中的资源分配状况。面孔加工具有特异性,不论知觉负荷的高低,作为干扰刺激的面孔都能得到一定程度的加工。不过面孔的表情和面孔的注视方向可能会受到知觉负荷的影响。其中,面孔的负性情绪相比正性和中性情绪,较少受知觉负荷的影响;正性和中性情绪相比负性情绪,更易受到知觉负荷的影响。面孔直视的注视方向不需要主观注意,较少受知觉负荷的影响;非直视的注视方向则容易受到知觉负荷的影响。今后可将研究范围拓展到种族、性别、年龄等范畴,探讨不同知觉负荷条件对于这些面孔信息的影响。     

注意捕获效应受知觉负载及目标与干扰项距离的共同影响

研究考察了无关干扰项引发的注意捕获效应如何受到任务知觉负载以及目标与干扰项距离的共同影响。被试在视觉搜索集中搜索目标并做辨别反应。通过控制搜索集的大小来控制任务知觉负载, 同时在搜索集中存在一个用颜色标定的无关干扰项(奇异项), 该奇异项与当前的搜索目标存在一致、中性或不一致的关系, 该奇异项的位置与当前目标相邻或相距较远。结果发现, 被试在低负载条件下出现显著的干扰效应(不一致条件的反应时减中性条件的反应时), 而在高负载条件下干扰效应减小。此外, 在高负载条件下, 当目标与干扰项相距较近时没有出现干扰效应, 而当目标与干扰项相距较远时存在显著的干扰效应。干扰效应受到任务知觉负载和目标与无关干扰项距离的共同影响。这些结果说明, 与任务无关的刺激是否捕获注意取决于当前任务总体上是否存在可用的剩余注意资源, 也受到其周围临近区域的局部注意资源是否充足的影响。     

知觉经验对面孔整体加工的影响

基于经验的整体加工理论认为, 随着知觉经验的增多, 人们加工面孔的专家化能力逐渐增强。其中一种表现形式为, 在知觉面孔时更倾向于整体加工。该理论已经得到了一些实验证据的支持, 但未能解释另外一些研究的发现, 即对他族人群没有长期知觉经验的被试在加工他族面孔时也有强烈的整体加工。本研究旨在考察知觉经验对面孔整体加工的影响, 包括两个实验。实验1a通过组合面孔范式测量了中国被试在辨别本族面孔、他族面孔和种族融合面孔时的组合面孔效应(即面孔整体加工强度)。结果发现, 被试在知觉种族融合面孔时没有表现出组合面孔效应, 在知觉本族面孔和他族面孔时都表现出强烈的组合面孔效应。实验1b以灰阶图重复了实验1a。结果发现, 被试在知觉种族融合面孔时仍然没有表现出组合面孔效应, 在知觉本族面孔和他族面孔时表现出强烈的组合面孔效应。实验2通过操纵种族融合面孔的有或无, 测量5 s的知觉经验对融合面孔的组合效应的影响。结果发现, 在经过短时的知觉经验后, 被试在知觉融合面孔时也表现出强烈的组合面孔效应。上述实验结果表明, 中国被试在加工本族面孔、他族面孔和种族融合面孔时所诱发组合面孔效应有显著的、量的差别, 且这种整体加工的差异不会受到面孔肤色信息的影响。在经过短时的知觉经验后, 中国被试在加工种族融合面孔时表现出强烈的整体加工。该研究的发现提示, 不论是短时知觉经验还是长期知觉经验, 知觉经验的增加是面孔整体加工的一个关键要素。     

知觉负载、注意定势与选择性注意

本研究采用Eriksen Flanker（侧抑制）范式,将当前任务区分为高、低知觉负载两种条件．并系统操纵边缘视野干扰项与中央靶子的不同加工层次关系,从而考察注意选择的知觉负载理论。实验一发现,高知觉负载情况下没有任何flanker冲突效应,而低知觉负载情况下既有知觉层次和反应层次的冲突效应,也有一致条件下的促进效应。实验二增加了一致条件试次的比例,从而操纵自上而下的注意定势,发现高、低知觉负载情况下都存在知觉冲突效应和一致条件下的促进效应。这些发现表明,对任务无关信息的加工既受到任务相关信息的知觉负载和剩余加工资源的分配的影响,也受到自上而下注意定势的影响;自下而上和自上而下过程相互作用,共同决定加工资源的分配和注意选择的认知阶段。     

情绪性工作记忆对选择性注意的影响

选取大学本科生33名,采用情绪启动范式与再认范式相结合,要求被试依次完成情绪词识记、目标面孔性别判断及情绪词再认任务,探讨保存于工作记忆中的情绪性刺激对面孔性别判断任务的影响。结果显示:(1)在中性和恐惧情绪启动刺激条件下,被试对目标面孔性别判断的反应时要显著长于悲伤条件。(2)在愉悦情绪启动词条件下,线索提示有效性差异显著;在无效线索提示条件下,启动刺激的不同情绪效价差异显著。(3)对情绪面孔性别与被试性别一致性/非一致性两种条件下反应时对比发现,男、女被试在情绪面孔性别判断任务中均表现出异性相吸效应。综上所述,保存在工作记忆中情绪刺激会对面孔性别的识别产生自上而下的影响。     

快乐表情对婴儿面孔种族知觉窄化的影响：眼动证据

本文利用眼动技术,采用改进的视觉配对比较范式,探究快乐表情是否及如何改变中国婴儿的面孔种族知觉窄化。实验一发现,中性条件下,6个月婴儿能识别本族和他族面孔,9个月婴儿仅能识别本族面孔;实验二发现,快乐条件下,9个月婴儿熟悉他族面孔后,能识别他族面孔,并且眼动结果表明,快乐条件下婴儿对他族面孔扫描模式不同于中性条件下,这种差异可能会影响到婴儿对他族面孔的识别。结果为婴儿期面孔知觉-社会加工联结假说提供了证据。     

道德信息对面孔吸引力判断的无意识调节

抽象语言信息是否能够影响知觉?本研究在审美领域对此进行考察,探索无意识获取的道德信息是否影响个体对相应面孔吸引力的知觉判断。结果发现个体对面孔吸引力的知觉判断受到内隐道德信息的调节,且调节效应与面孔本身吸引力水平无关; 另外,面孔审美判断的反应时受到道德美丑和面孔吸引力的共同影响,尤其当两类信息相矛盾时被试需要更长的时间进行判断。研究结果表明抽象的社会道德信息可以对面孔吸引力的知觉判断产生自上而下的调节。     

群组视角观点采择：自动加工的证据

基于经典的视觉观点采择范式,本研究探讨人们如何采择群组视角观点。研究创设了自我视角信息与群组视角信息一致与不一致条件,比较两种条件下被试对自我视角信息判断的反应时。若被试在视角信息不一致条件下的反应时显著长于其在一致条件下时,提示被试在判断自我视角信息时受到了群组视角信息的干扰,即自动加工了群组视角的观点。结果显示,相比视角信息一致条件,被试在视角信息不一致条件下反应时更长。当虚拟人物群组被箭头替代后,被试自动加工群组视角信息效应消失。该结果揭示,人们会自动地加工社会群组的视觉信息,且该效应不能由物理层面的指向所解释。     

面孔知觉中的适应现象

人们在比较长时间地知觉加工面孔中的性别、表情、种族、年龄等信息时, 会产生适应现象, 即对这些信息的变化更加敏感, 甚至因过度敏感而产生面孔知觉错觉。研究者创设了适应范式(adaptation paradigm)用于面孔知觉研究, 大多集中于探讨面孔各个维度知觉上怎样出现适应效应, 发现面孔适应效应受制于多种因素, 最近几年研究焦点转向了对面孔属性间关系的探索。未来研究尚需要加强面孔知觉适应的过程研究以及提高面孔适应研究的生态效度等。     

面孔知觉中面孔性别与情绪表情的相互作用

面孔知觉中, 面孔性别与表情的加工有不同的机制。Bruce和Young (1986)及Haxby, Hoffman和Gobbini (2000)的面孔知觉理论虽然对表情加工也较为关注, 但对面孔性别加工机制的解释却较少, 也未能明确面孔性别与表情的相互关系。当前关于两者是否独立加工尚无明确结论, 但更多证据支持它们相互影响。我们认为, Garner范式下面孔性别与表情加工的研究可能忽略了面孔熟悉性因素。同时, 面孔适应范式为该研究领域提供了新的思路。此外, 文章对于两者相互作用的机制也进行了一定的探讨。     

Race and gender of faces can be ignored

Past research indicates that faces can be more difficult to ignore than other types of stimuli. Given the important social and biological relevance of race and gender, the present study examined whether the processing of these facial characteristics is mandatory. Both unfamiliar and famous faces were assessed. Participants made speeded judgments about either the race (Experiment 1) or gender (Experiments 2–4) of a target name under varying levels of perceptual load, while ignoring a flanking distractor face that was either congruent or incongruent with the race/gender of the target name. In general, distractor–target congruency effects emerged when the perceptual load of the relevant task was low but not when the load was high, regardless of whether the distractor face was unfamiliar or famous. These findings suggest that face processing is not necessarily mandatory, and some aspects of faces can be ignored.     

Processing overlap-dependent distractor dilution rather than perceptual target load determines attentional selectivity

The perceptual load theory of attentional selection argues that the degree to which distractors interfere with target processing is determined by the “perceptual load” (or discrimination difficulty) of target processing: when perceptual load is low, distractors interfere to a greater extent than when it is high. A well-known exception is load-independent interference effects from face distractors during processing of name targets. This finding was reconciled with load theory by proposing distinct processing resources for faces versus names. In the present study, we revisit this effect to test (a) whether increasing the processing overlap (perceptual, lexical, conceptual) between potential targets and distractors would reinstate the classic load effect, and (b) whether this data pattern could be better explained by load theory or by a rival account that argues that distractor dilution rather than target load determines the degree of distractor interference. Over four experiments, we first replicate the original finding and then show that load effects grow with increasing processing overlap between potential targets and distractors. However, by adding dilution conditions, we also show that these processing overlap dependent modulations of distractor interference can be explained by the distractor dilution perspective but not by perceptual load theory. Thus, our findings support a processing overlap dilution account of attentional selection.     

自我相关信息的加工优势：来自网名识别的证据

以网名为材料, 通过三项视觉搜索实验考察了与自我相关的网络信息可能存在的加工优势。结果发现, 自己的网名在作为靶刺激时可以更快且更准确地被探测出来; 而在作为干扰刺激时, 其对于靶刺激却并未表现出比对照刺激更强的抑制作用。在与真实人名进行的直接比较中, 自己的网名与真实人名的加工成绩未出现显著差异, 且都好于作为对照的名人名字。这些结果证明了与自我相关的网络信息具有和物理世界中的自我信息相似的加工优势, 且与以真实人名为材料的多项实验结果完全一致, 从而表明自己的网名与真实人名可能具有相同的加工机制。     

Long-term effects of covert face recognition

Covert face recognition has previously been thought to produce only very short-lasting effects. In this study we demonstrate that manipulating subjects' attentional load affects explicit, but not implicit memory for faces, and that implicit effects can persist over much longer intervals than is normally reported. Subjects performed letter-string tasks of high vs. low perceptual load (Lavie, N. (1995). Perceptual load as a necessary condition for selective attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfomance. 21, 451-468.), while ignoring task-irrelevant celebrity faces. Memory for the faces was then assessed using (a) a surprise recognition test for the celebrities' names, and (b) repetition priming in a face familiarity task. The load manipulation strongly influenced explicit recognition memory, but had no effect on repetition priming from the same items. Moreover, faces from the high load condition produced the same amount of priming whether they were explicitly remembered or not. This result resolves a long-standing anomaly in the face recognition literature, and is discussed in relation to covert processing in prosopagnosia.     

Interference from familiar natural distractors is not eliminated by high perceptual load

A crucial prediction of perceptual load theory is that high perceptual load can eliminate interference from distractors. However, Lavie et al. (Psychol Sci 14:510–515, 2003) found that high perceptual load did not eliminate interference when the distractor was a face. The current experiments examined the interaction between familiarity and perceptual load in modulating interference in a name search task. The data reveal that high perceptual load eliminated the interference effect for unfamiliar distractors that were faces or objects, but did not eliminate the interference for familiar distractors that were faces or objects. Based on these results, we proposed that the processing of familiar and natural stimuli may be immune to the effect of perceptual load.     

Does emotion processing require attention? The effects of fear conditioning and perceptual load

This study examined the impact of perceptual load on the processing of unattended threat-relevant faces. Participants performed a central letter-classification task while ignoring irrelevant face distractors, which appeared above or below the central task. The face distractors were graded for affective salience by means of aversive fear conditioning, with a conditioned angry face (CS+), an unconditioned angry face (CS-), and a neutral control face. The letter-classification task was presented under conditions of both low and high perceptual load. Results showed that fear conditioned (i.e., CS+) angry face distractors interfered with task performance more than CS- angry or neutral face distractors but that this interference was completely eliminated by high perceptual load. These findings demonstrate that aversively conditioned face distractors capture attention only under conditions of low perceptual load.     

Trait anxiety and perceptual load as determinants of emotion processing in a fear conditioning paradigm

The impact of trait anxiety and perceptual load on selective attention was examined in a fear conditioning paradigm. A fear-conditioned angry face (CS+), an unconditioned angry face (CS-), or an unconditioned face with a neutral or happy expression were used in distractor interference and attentional probe tasks. In Experiments 1 and 2, participants classified centrally presented letters under two conditions of perceptual load. When perceptual load was high, distractors had no effect on selective attention, even with aversive conditioning. However, when perceptual load was low, strong response interference effects for CS+ face distractors were found for low trait-anxious participants. Across both experiments, this enhanced distractor interference reversed to strong facilitation effects for those reporting high trait anxiety. Thus, high trait-anxious participants were faster, rather than slower, when ignoring CS+ distractors. Using an attentional probe task in Experiment 3, it was found that fear conditioning resulted in strong attentional avoidance in a high trait-anxious group, which contrasted with enhanced vigilance in a low trait-anxious group. These results demonstrate that the impact of fear conditioning on attention is modulated by individual variation in trait anxiety when perceptual load is low. Fear conditioning elicits an avoidance of threat-relevant stimuli in high trait-anxious participants.     

Females excel at basic face perception

Females are generally better than males at recognizing facial emotions. However, it is not entirely clear whether and in what way females may also excel at non-affective face recognition. Here, we tested males and females on two perceptual face recognition tasks that involved only neutral expressions: detection and identity discrimination. On face detection (Experiment 1), females were significantly more accurate than males in detecting upright faces. This gender difference was reduced during inverted face detection, and not present during tree detection, suggesting that the magnitude of the gender difference for performance co-varies with the extent to which face processing mechanisms are involved. On facial identity discrimination (Experiment 2), females again outperformed males, particularly when face images were masked by visual noise, or the delay between comparison face images was extended from 0.5 to 3 s. These results reveal a female advantage in processing face-specific information and underscore the role of perceptual factors in socially relevant gender differences.     

The inability to ignore auditory distractors as a function of visual task perceptual load

Using a response competition paradigm, we investigated the ability to ignore target response-compatible, target response-incompatible, and neutral visual and auditory distractors presented during a visual search task. The perceptual load model of attention (e.g., Lavie & Tsal, 1994) states that task-relevant processing load determines irrelevant distractor processing in such a way that increasing processing load prevents distractor processing. In three experiments, participants searched sets of one (easy search) or six (hard search) similar items. In Experiment 1, visual distractors influenced reaction time (RT) and accuracy only for easy searches, following the perceptual load model. Surprisingly, auditory distractors yielded larger distractor compatibility effects (median RT for incompatible trials minus median RT for compatible trials) for hard searches than for easy searches. In Experiments 2 and 3, during hard searches, consistent RT benefits with response-compatible and RT costs with response-incompatible auditory distractors occurred only for hard searches. We suggest that auditory distractors are processed regardless of visual perceptual load but that the ability to inhibit cross-modal influence from auditory distractors is reduced under high visual load.