图形视觉与心理表象眼动模式的比较研究

本研究通过比较图形视觉和心理表象以及不同认知框架下表象加工的眼动参数,揭示图形视觉加工和心理表象加工的特点.结果表明,从视知觉到视觉心理表象,眼动被币新编码,眼动模式更加简洁,视觉心理表象具有一定的概括性;认知框架影响视觉心理表象加工的眼动模式.     

视觉表象操作加工的眼动实验研究

本研究通过视觉表象旋转和扫描的眼动实验探讨表象的心理表征方式。实验一结果表明,眼动指标具有与反应时相类似的旋转角度效应。实验二结果显示,表象扫描的反应时和眼动指标都具有与知觉扫描加工一样的距离效应。由此可以认为,表象眼动与知觉眼动模式具有相似性;表象具有相对独立的心理表征方式并有其特殊的加工过程;表象的心理表征可以是形象表征,而非一定是抽象的命题或符号表征     

任务信息通达对视觉表象眼动的影响

通过两个实验探讨了视觉表象任务信息的通达对表象加工眼动的影响。结果表明, 在低通达条件下, 表象任务的眼动复制了知觉任务的眼动; 随着表象任务信息通达水平的提高, 眼动的注视点平均持续时间、平均眼跳距离和平均眼跳时间会发生规律性变化; 眼动控制与任务信息通达水平对表象眼动的影响存在不同的机制。实验结果佐证了眼动在视觉表象中起机能性作用的观点。     

图画知觉过程的眼动研究进展

阅读和图画知觉是眼动研究中的两个主要的课题。随着眼动研究的深入,人们逐渐发现,虽然阅读与图画知觉过程之间的眼动有许多相似之处,有关阅读眼动过程的一些研究结论可以在图画知觉过程中推广应用;但是二者之间也存在着重要差异,一些在阅读过程中所获得的眼动结论,并不都适用于图画知觉过程。为了进一步考察阅读与图画知觉过程     

从表征和认知过程上看表象与知觉、记忆的关系

表象、知觉和记忆是一个整合的认知系统。由于知觉和记忆提供了表象生成的材料,因而三者共享相似的表征,并激活广泛而相似的脑区。然而在认知加工过程上三者存在一定的差异。与知觉相比,表象的编码方式更抽象、更依赖过去经验的参与且处理细节能力更弱;与记忆相比,表象更容易受无关信息的干扰。未来对三者关系的研究应关注不同来源和不同类型的表象与知觉、记忆之间的关系,以及工作记忆在三者关系中所起的作用。     

听觉诱发表象的眼动机制

视觉心理表象是一种基于过去经验的自上而下的加工过程,它是信息表征的一种形式.以往的研究主要采用视觉来诱发表象,但是这很难排除视觉后像的干扰,而且与表象“自上而下”的加工过程不一致.听觉诱发表象很好地解决了视觉后像的干扰问题,也更吻合表象“自上而下”的加工过程,因为被试产生的表象是基于自己过去的经验,从自身出发,主动加工的结果.采用实验法,考察通过听觉通道诱发表象眼动的情况,使用眼动仪记录被试的眼动轨迹.结果发现：（1）不管是运动还是静止的物体,都能诱发表象,在表象时存在眼动行为.（2）运动的物体诱发眼动的程度更大.（3）眼动影响表象的建构,在表象建构中起机能性作用.     

文化差异与融合：蒙古族大学生场景知觉的眼动研究

运用眼动技术对蒙古国蒙古族大学生、中国内蒙古蒙古族大学生和汉族大学生的场景知觉特点进行对比,旨在从文化差异与文化融合的角度探讨文化对认知的作用。结果发现,内蒙古蒙古族和汉族大学生的眼动指标无显著差异,均重视背景与前景物体的关系,而蒙古国大学生更加注意对前景物体的知觉,这与汉族和内蒙古蒙古族大学显著不同。文化差异影响个体的认知,文化融合会对认知产生建构作用,这种作用具有动态性。     

场景知觉中的眼动分析指标:基于注视和眼跳视角

眼动范式是场景知觉研究的重要方法之一,可以通过对场景知觉过程中眼动变化的实时记录,真实地反映场景信息加工的内在心理机制;然而,人们的心理活动是极其复杂的,与之相应的眼动指标也具有多样性和复杂性。对眼动指标的分析,有不同的分析维度,比如整体和局部、时间和空间等。本文回顾了已有的眼动指标分类,并尝试从注视和眼跳的视角对场景知觉过程中的眼动指标进行分类。在此基础上,从界定标准、心理学意义、研究应用等方面对相应的眼动指标进行分析和介绍,最后提出了眼动指标分析和应用可能存在的问题,以及未来研究可能拓展的领域。     

平滑追踪眼动及其对运动物体时空特征表征和预测的影响

平滑追踪眼动是人们对环境中感兴趣的运动物体进行持续视觉追踪的一种眼动行为, 它受个体在其过程中获得的视觉信息和眼动反馈信息等感知觉因素, 以及心理表征和期待等高水平认知因素的影响。同时, 平滑追踪眼动过程影响着个体的预测性眼动追踪、追赶性眼跳、空间定位和接触时间估计等涉及运动物体时空特征表征和预测的行为。未来的研究应注意探讨在平滑追踪眼动过程中获得的感知觉信息和高水平认知因素对上述时空特征表征和预测行为的影响。     

微眼动的识别技术

微眼动是人在注视过程中产生的幅度和速率都相对较大的眼动,它与多种高级认知功能如注意、知觉等有着密切的联系。微眼动研究中的一个重点和难点是如何有效地识别微眼动。文章对微眼动的识别技术进行了综述,包括:1)微眼动的基本参数及发展;2)几种有代表性的微眼动技术,包括传统基于经验的识别技术、新近的基于速率变异的识别技术、基于小波分析的识别技术以及基于聚类分析的识别技术;3)对这些技术之间各自的优、缺点进行了比较并就新的研究方向进行了展望。     

视觉表象眼动的变化：知识还是技能表征的差异？

以表象看到一个运动员完成三级跳远项目为实验任务,对表象任务的信息通达水平、眼动注视点的活动位置和被试对三级跳远项目的知识水平和技能水平进行系统的操纵,通过2个实验探讨了视觉表象眼动的变化是基于知识学习表征差异还是技能训练表征差异的问题。实验1以没有三级跳远运动专业技能知识且对该运动的认知水平也较低的大学生为被试,结果表明,在完成高信息通达水平的表象任务时,注视点需要较短的持续时间,但眼跳距离会增大,眼跳频率会变低;实验2对表象任务的知识学习表征水平和技能训练表征水平进行操纵,分别以对实验任务进行过知识学习和专业技能训练的人为被试,结果表明,随着被试知识习得水平和技能水平表征能力的提高,不同表象任务信息通达水平间的眼动差异将消失,但知识学习和技能表征的差异在平均眼跳时间上有差异,技能训练型的被试其平均眼跳时间要短于知识学习型被试,达到临界水平显著,注视点平均持续时间和平均眼跳距离等均没有差异。     

Eye movements and scene perception.

Research on eye movements and scene perception is reviewed. Following an initial discussion of some basic facts about eye movements and perception, the following topics are discussed: (I) the span of effective vision during scene perception, (2) the role of eye movements in scene perception, (3) integration of information across saccades, (4) scene context, object identification and eye movements, and (5) the control of eye movements. The relationship of eye movements during reading to eye movements during scene perception is considered. A preliminary model of eye movement control in scene perception is described and directions for future research are suggested.     

Eye movements disrupt episodic future thinking

Remembering the past and imagining the future both rely on complex mental imagery. We considered the possibility that constructing a future scene might tap a component of mental imagery that is not as critical for remembering past scenes. Whereas visual imagery plays an important role in remembering the past, we predicted that spatial imagery plays a crucial role in imagining the future. For the purpose of teasing apart the different components underpinning scene construction in the two experiences of recalling episodic memories and shaping novel future events, we used a paradigm that might selectively affect one of these components (i.e., the spatial). Participants performed concurrent eye movements while remembering the past and imagining the future. These concurrent eye movements selectively interfere with spatial imagery, while sparing visual imagery. Eye movements prevented participants from imagining complex and detailed future scenes, but had no comparable effect on the recollection of past scenes. Similarities between remembering the past and imagining the future are coupled with some differences. The present findings uncover another fundamental divergence between the two processes.     

Eye movements and visual imagery in free recall

The relationship between eye movements and visual imagery has almost exclusively been studied by treating eye movements as the dependent variable while an imagery task is being performed. In the present experiment three eye-movement treatment conditions were manipulated, within Ss, as the independent variable in order to study their effects on the free recall of nouns which Ss had to store by means of imagery. The imagery-evoking capacity (I) of nouns was varied over three levels within lists of Dutch nouns (Low, Medium and High I). Ss were instructed to generate a visual image to each separate noun under the following treatment conditions: (a) while they looked over and scanned their image as if they were looking at the real object: (b) while they received concurrent visual stimulation from a checkerboard pattern; (c) while they fixated on a target. Reliable, but minor effects of treatment conditions on the recall scores were found. The results were discussed in terms of possible theories about the nature of the relationship between eye movements and visual imagery.     

Eye scanpaths during visual imagery reenact those of perception of the same visual scene

Eye movements during mental imagery are not epiphenomenal but assist the process of image generation. Commands to the eyes for each fixation are stored along with the visual representation and are used as spatial index in a motor‐based coordinate system for the proper arrangement of parts of an image. In two experiments, subjects viewed an irregular checkerboard or color pictures of fish and were subsequently asked to form mental images of these stimuli while keeping their eyes open. During the perceptual phase, a group of subjects was requested to maintain fixation onto the screen's center, whereas another group was free to inspect the stimuli. During the imagery phase, all of these subjects were free to move their eyes. A third group of subjects (in Experiment 2) was free to explore the pattern but was requested to maintain central fixation during imagery. For subjects free to explore the pattern, the percentage of time spent fixating a specific location during perception was highly correlated with the time spent on the same (empty) locations during imagery. The order of scanning of these locations during imagery was correlated to the original order during perception. The strength of relatedness of these scanpaths and the vividness of each image predicted performance accuracy. Subjects who fixed their gaze centrally during perception did the same spontaneously during imagery. Subjects free to explore during perception, but maintaining central fixation during imagery, showed decreased ability to recall the pattern. We conclude that the eye scanpaths during visual imagery reenact those of perception of the same visual scene and that they play a functional role.     

Visual imagery differences and eye movements in the recall of pictures

Groups of vivid and poor visualizers were given a picture memory task. and horizontal and vertical components of the electro-oculogram were recorded. This allowed a detailed investigation of each S’s eye movements in the perception. imagery, and recall phases of the task. The vivid visualizers gave a higher accuracy of recall Eye movement rate was lower in visual imagery than it was in perception, especially in the goup of vivid visualizers. There was some evidence of scanning activity prior to recall, but only if positional cues were provided or if recall was incorrect. No scanning occurred prior to accurate recall unprompted by a positional cue. These results provide no support to the theories of image construction proposed by Hebb (1949, 1968) and Neisser (1967). As suggested by Singer (1966), an absence of eye movement may be a necessary condition for vivid visual imagery.     

Eye movements disrupt spatial but not visual mental imagery

It has long been known that eye movements are functionally involved in the generation and maintenance of mental images. Indeed, a number of studies demonstrated that voluntary eye movements interfere with mental imagery tasks (e.g., Laeng and Teodorescu in Cogn Sci 26:207–231, 2002). However, mental imagery is conceived as a multifarious cognitive function with at least two components, a spatial component and a visual component. The present study investigated the question of whether eye movements disrupt mental imagery in general or only its spatial component. We present data on healthy young adults, who performed visual and spatial imagery tasks concurrently with a smooth pursuit. In line with previous literature, results revealed that eye movements had a strong disruptive effect on spatial imagery. Moreover, we crucially demonstrated that eye movements had no disruptive effect when participants visualized the depictive aspects of an object. Therefore, we suggest that eye movements serve to a greater extent the spatial than the visual component of mental imagery.