言语与空间任务指令对数字-空间联结编码的影响

以1～9除5外的阿拉伯数字和汉字标签“左”“右”为实验材料,采用数字奇偶判断任务,探讨任务指令对数字-空间联结编码的影响。结果发现：言语任务指令条件下,词语一致性与物理一致性的交互作用显著,且词语一致和不一致时均未发现空间-数字联合反应编码效应（SNARC）,表明言语-空间编码在数字-空间联结中更有优势;空间任务指令条件下,物理一致性主效应显著,且词语一致和不一致时均出现了SNARC效应,表明视觉空间编码更有优势。说明数字-空间联结编码受实验任务指令的影响,被试会根据任务指令设置的情景选择视觉空间编码或言语-空间编码对数字进行空间联结。     

空间-时间关联的中介共同表征结构:来自反转STEARC效应的证据

通过3个双任务实验(诱导任务和特征任务)探讨空间-时间联合编码(STEARC)效应的加工机制。实验1采用时间信息作为诱导任务材料,实验2采用空间信息作为诱导任务材料,在特征任务中都发现映射不一致组被试(看到过去/左侧刺激时按右键反应,看到未来/右侧刺激时按左键反应)出现反转STEARC效应,映射一致组被试表现出常规的STEARC效应,表明从时间信息加工到空间反应过程符合中介共同表征结构。实验3分离两种任务的反应方式(手动和眼动),发现不一致映射规则下,被试仍然表现出常规的STEARC效应,表明这种中介共同表征结构存在特定联结效应,即在不同反应器中出现时间和空间相互独立的表征结构。总体而言,研究支持空间-时间关联符合中介共同表征结构,并且这种关联中存在反应器特定联结效应。     

空间-时间联合编码效应：来自手动和眼动证据

本研究探讨汉语背景下不同反应方式（手动,眼动）、不同方位（水平,垂直）上空间-时间联合编码效应（STEARC效应）存在的可能性。四个实验均采用两类时间词语诱发被试的时间表征,采用2（时间：过去、将来）×2（反应手/眼跳方向：左、右/上、下）的被试内设计。结果表明汉语背景下的人们将过去和身体左边（上）联系在一起,把将来和右边（下）联系在一起,人们存在自左向右和自上而下的STEARC效应,这种效应不存在手动和眼动的分离,人们对时间的表征不仅是一条时间线,更是一个心理时间地图。     

汉语背景下左右走向的心理时间线

摘 要 通过两个实验探讨了汉语背景下是否存在左右走向的心理时间线。实验一,表示过去和未来的时间词作为刺激,呈现在屏幕的左侧或右侧,要求被试用两手按键对刺激进行过去意义词和未来意义词的分类。实验二,采用线索提示范式的变式,中央的时间词作为线索,完成左侧或右侧闪现的圆点的定位任务。结果发现：（1）对过去意义词用左手反应或呈现在左边反应更快,对未来意义词用右手反应或呈现在右边反应更快,存在空间时间反应编码联合效应（STEARC效应）。（2）未来意义词显著激活对右空间的注意,过去意义词存在激活左空间注意的倾向。表明时间存在左右走向的心理表征,过去表征到左边,未来表征到右边。     

数字-空间联结SNARC效应的编码：视觉空间和言语空间

采用Gevers等的实验范式,以判断数字大小并选择不同言语符号方向信息左右为任务。材料为阿拉伯数字（1、2、8、9）和汉字、英文单词符号（“左”、“右”、“left”、“m#t”）。考察在不同语言符号方向信息下数字-空间联结SANBC效应的编码方式,结果发现：（1）在汉字和英文符号信息下,被试在数字大小比较任务中都表现出SNARC效应;（2）在汉字符号方向信息下。SNARC效应的编码方式主要存在视觉空间和言语空间编码,且以言语空间编码为主;（3）在英文符号方向信息下。SNARC效应的鳊码方式主要是视觉空间编码。     

基于客体的空间一致性效应:功能可见性或空间位置编码?

采用空间Simon任务范式,考察基于客体空间一致性效应到底是手柄的功能可见性引起,还是其空间位置编码导致。实验1采用Pellicano等(2010)研究中的带手柄电筒,要求被试完成与抓握功能相关的形状判断任务,结果表明,唯有当电筒开时,被试产生了基于客体的空间一致性效应。实验2去除电筒可抓握的手柄,发现无论电筒开或关,均出现了更大的基于客体空间一致性效应。上述结果与空间编码假说一致,表明空间位置编码是产生基于客体空间一致性效应的原因。     

言语次级干扰任务对客体与空间信息保持的影响

通过3个行为实验,以44名大学生或研究生为被试,考察了言语次级干扰任务是否对不同言语命名难度的客体与空间工作记忆信息的保持产生选择性干扰。研究发现:无论记忆对象是言语命名困难的客体信息,还是言语命名容易的客体信息,无论探测刺激是图形形式,还是词语形式,言语次级干扰任务都对客体信息的保持产生选择性干扰;但言语次级干扰任务对空间信息保持的影响,在不同条件下则表现出不同的特点。实验结果表明客体工作记忆自动、强制性地使用言语编码和保持机制,而空间工作记忆信息的保持是否由言语编码参与则受到其他因素的影响。     

注视-西蒙效应的空间编码机制

采用注视-西蒙范式探讨了注视方向知觉的空间编码机制。实验一让被试采用双手交叉的反应方式,发现注视-西蒙效应并不随反应手的交叉而反转,说明它涉及抽象的空间方向编码,而非基于以手为参照系的半侧优势效应。实验二采用纯音音调辨别任务,发现了典型的注视-西蒙效应,结合实验一视觉通道的结果,说明注视-西蒙效应并非特异于视觉通道,它可能发生在晚期的反应选择阶段,而非早期的知觉阶段。结果支持注视线索能够自动诱发观察者形成抽象的方向表征的观点。     

数字的时间特性:时间数字联合反应编码效应

本研究采用SNARC效应的实验变式探讨了数字的时间特性。结果发现:(1)大数字在前信号处反应会更快,小数字在前信号处反应相对较慢。时间数字联合反应编码效应(TNARC效应)是存在的。(2)空间任务中未能发现数字的时间特性起作用,排除空间因素后出现TNARC效应。研究结果表明,数字加工中除了空间编码,也存在时间编码。     

视觉和言语空间信息共同作用下SNARC效应的空间参照特点

已有研究显示,SNARC效应存在多个灵活的空间参照系统,可在不同的实验条件下激活。心理数字线理论对于SNARC效应空间编码的理解仅局限于物理空间层面,并不能很好地甄别SNARC效应空间参照系统的激活条件。研究以视觉空间和言语空间双编码理论为基础,考查在视觉空间信息与言语空间信息共同作用下,单手（左手或右手）与双手反应下SNARC效应的空间参照特点。结果显示,在视觉空间信息与言语空间信息共同作用下,左手、右手和双手反应下均出现了典型SNARC效应,且左手、右手和双手反应下的数字空间映射模式相似。研究结果证实,在视觉-空间与言语空间信息共同作用下仅激活SNARC效应多个灵活的空间参照系统中的身体中心为基础的参照系统,说明言语空间信息的参与有助于激活该效应中身体中心为基础的空间参照系统。     

SNARC效应: 现状、理论与建议

SNARC效应是当对数字进行奇偶判断时,即使数的奇偶性与数的大小无关,但右手（左手）对相对大（小）的数的反应快。首先介绍SNARC效应的起源和理论解释,然后总结SNARC效应的特性,论述SNARC效应和Simon效应以及MARC 效应的关系,并对SNARC效应的脑机制进行了概述,最后提出3个有待深入研究的问题：（1）SNARC效应的加工处理机制;（2）SANRC效应的理论探索;（3）SNARC效应的本质。     

Task instructions determine the visuospatial and verbal–spatial nature of number–space associations

Evidence for number–space associations comes from the spatial–numerical association of response codes (SNARC) effect, consisting in faster reaction times to small/large digits with the left/right hand, respectively. Two different proposals are commonly discussed concerning the cognitive origin of the SNARC effect: the visuospatial account and the verbal–spatial account. Recent studies have provided evidence for the relative dominance of verbal–spatial over visuospatial coding mechanisms, when both mechanisms were directly contrasted in a magnitude comparison task. However, in these studies, participants were potentially biased towards verbal–spatial number processing by task instructions based on verbal–spatial labels. To overcome this confound and to investigate whether verbal–spatial coding mechanisms are predominantly activated irrespective of task instructions, we completed the previously used paradigm by adding a spatial instruction condition. In line with earlier findings, we could confirm the predominance of verbal–spatial number coding under verbal task instructions. However, in the spatial instruction condition, both verbal–spatial and visuospatial mechanisms were activated to an equal extent. Hence, these findings clearly indicate that the cognitive origin of number–space associations does not always predominantly rely on verbal–spatial processing mechanisms, but that the spatial code associated with numbers is context dependent.     

视觉空间指令条件下SOAs变化对数字-空间联结编码的影响:来自ERP的证据

采用数字奇偶判断任务,以数字1-9(5除外)及汉字标签(左、右)作为实验材料,在视觉空间任务指令下探讨系统改变SOAs对数字-空间联结编码方式的影响。行为结果发现,SNARC效应以视觉空间编码方式为主,SOA为0ms并未出现SNARC效应; ERP结果发现,物理一致性在早期成分N1上的主效应显著。表明任务指导语影响SNARC效应的编码方式,其本质受词语信息标签加工程度的影响,且对SNARC效应的编码出现早期感觉阶段,SOAs与目标数字的特性影响SNARC效应的产生。     

Bad–good constraints on a polarity correspondence account for the spatial–numerical association of response codes (SNARC) and markedness association of response codes (MARC) effects

Performance in numerical classification tasks involving either parity or magnitude judgements is quicker when small numbers are mapped onto a left-sided response and large numbers onto a right-sided response than for the opposite mapping (i.e., the spatial–numerical association of response codes or SNARC effect). Recent research by Gevers et al. [Gevers, W., Santens, S., Dhooge, E., Chen, Q., Van den Bossche, L., Fias, W., & Verguts, T. (2010). Verbal-spatial and visuospatial coding of number–space interactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 139, 180–190] suggests that this effect also arises for vocal “left” and “right” responding, indicating that verbal–spatial coding has a role to play in determining it. Another presumably verbal-based, spatial–numerical mapping phenomenon is the linguistic markedness association of response codes (MARC) effect whereby responding in parity tasks is quicker when odd numbers are mapped onto left-sided responses and even numbers onto right-sided responses. A recent account of both the SNARC and MARC effects is based on the polarity correspondence principle [Proctor, R. W., & Cho, Y. S. (2006). Polarity correspondence: A general principle for performance of speeded binary classification tasks. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 416–442]. This account assumes that stimulus and response alternatives are coded along any number of dimensions in terms of – and + polarities with quicker responding when the polarity codes for the stimulus and the response correspond. In the present study, even–odd parity judgements were made using either “left” and “right” or “bad” and “good” vocal responses. Results indicated that a SNARC effect was indeed present for the former type of vocal responding, providing further evidence for the sufficiency of the verbal–spatial coding account for this effect. However, the decided lack of an analogous SNARC-like effect in the results for the latter type of vocal responding provides an important constraint on the presumed generality of the polarity correspondence account. On the other hand, the presence of robust MARC effects for “bad” and “good” but not “left” and “right” vocal responses is consistent with the view that such effects are due to conceptual associations between semantic codes for odd–even and bad–good (but not necessarily left–right).     

Numbers and space: a computational model of the SNARC effect

The SNARC (spatial numerical associations of response codes) effect reflects the tendency to respond faster with the left hand to relatively small numbers and with the right hand to relatively large numbers (S. Dehaene, S. Bossini, & P. Giraux, 1993). Using computational modeling, the present article aims to provide a framework for conceptualizing the SNARC effect. In line with models of spatial stimulus-response congruency, the authors modeled the SNARC effect as the result of parallel activation of preexisting links between magnitude and spatial representation and short-term links created on the basis of task instructions. This basic dual-route model simulated all characteristics associated with the SNARC effect. In addition, 2 experiments tested and confirmed new predictions derived from the model.     

Comparing implicit and synaesthetic number–space associations: Visuospatial and verbal spatial–numerical associations of response codes

In the theory of the mental number line, number, and space are implicitly associated, giving rise to the spatial–numerical association of response codes (SNARC) effect, in which smaller numbers are more readily associated with the left side of space and larger numbers with the right, during a parity judgement task. Others, however, have argued that the SNARC effect is flexible and better explained by verbal rather than spatial associations. A few single-case studies on the SNARC effect have tested number–space synaesthetes, who make explicit associations between number and space. Here, we present data from experiments conducted on groups of synaesthetes and nonsynaesthetes on the classic SNARC parity judgement task with lateralized response keys and a modified version in which they responded to labels appearing on screen. Synaesthetes' behaviour was expected to differ from nonsynaesthetes' behaviour due to the explicit, fixed nature of their number–space associations, but both experiments show the two groups behaving in the same way, indicating that parity judgement tasks may not be tapping the same representation of number that gives rise to synaesthetic number–space experiences.     

数字-空间联结的内在机制：基于工作记忆的视角

已有研究证实数字-空间联结是普遍存在的现象，但关于这种联结的解释仍存在争论。当前对数字-空间联结主要有两种解释。其中，心理数字线假设数字的心理表征是一条从左到右方向的水平线，而工作记忆假设认为数字-空间联结是任务执行期间暂时的工作记忆表征。本文通过分析心理数字线不能解释的数字-空间联结现象及局限性，来探讨工作记忆解释的适用性，并通过工作记忆的核心观点来解释数字-空间联结现象，以期更好地揭示数字-空间联结的内在机制。但关于工作记忆解释仍有亟待解决的问题，还需实证研究探讨。