视觉搜索中注意模板促进搜索的内在机制

生物的视觉搜索能力对适应外部复杂环境具有非常重要的生存意义。注意模板可以在搜索任务的过程中增强相关信息和抑制无关信息, 从而快速找到目标。总结近期研究结果主要有以下发现：在建立注意模板的过程中并不能明确是基于语义信息还是视觉特征信息; 注意模板不仅可以存储在工作记忆中, 也可以存储在长时记忆中; 不同类型注意模板的神经机制存在差异。未来的研究应关注注意模板在建立过程中内部信息如何传递, 并关注不同人群注意模板的神经机制, 以及解决拒绝模板抑制机制的理论争议。     

额叶在启动效应中的作用机制：对额叶损伤病人颜色命名和词命名任务的分析

以额叶损伤病人为被试,探讨在知觉型联想启动和知觉启动中,额叶的作用及其内在机制。实验任务包括颜色命名和词命名任务,以及相应的再认任务。结果表明,额叶损伤病人在颜色命名和词命名任务中,对旧词和重组颜色词的命名时间都没有明显差别,联想启动和颜色启动效应受损,但轻度记忆损伤病人与正常对照组之间的再认成绩相似。相关分析发现联想启动和颜色启动与额叶的多项功能有中度相关。这表明,额叶参与了知觉型联想启动效应和知觉启动,并且与其抑制和注意等执行功能有关。     

语言熟练度对Stroop效应的影响——不平衡双语者的任务态fMRI研究

目的:探讨语言熟练度对Stroop效应的影响及其背后的脑机制。材料与方法:17位被试参与本研究。被试母语为汉语,第二语言为英语。在被试完成中英文的stroop色字的任务过程中对被试进行fMRI扫描。结果:在色字相一致的条件下,中文任务与英文任务相比,双侧背侧枕叶及右侧背外侧前额叶有更强的激活; 反向比较,双侧腹侧枕叶有更强的激活。在色字不一致的条件下,中文任务与英文任务相比,双侧背外侧前额叶、右侧枕下回有更强的激活; 反向比较,并无显著激活的脑区。此外,中文Stroop效应引起左侧额下回显著的激活。英文Stroop效应中,左侧额下回无显著激活。结论:结合前人研究,我们得出,语言熟练度影响了对注意控制有重要作用的背外侧前额叶以及与反应抑制有关的左侧额下回在Stroop任务中的参与程度,进而影响了Stroop任务的表现     

无关长时记忆表征能否引导视觉注意选择?

与任务相关的长时记忆表征在引导视觉注意选择的过程中扮演着重要的角色,它可以使人们在熟悉的视觉情境中快速搜索目标刺激,并偏离干扰刺激。但当长时记忆表征与任务无关时,还能否引导视觉注意选择?目前还不清楚。实验1采用眼动追踪技术直接比较无关工作记忆表征与无关长时记忆表征在视觉搜索阶段对视觉注意的捕获效应,行为反应时与首次注视点百分率的结果都发现,当无关工作记忆表征在视觉搜索中再次出现时能引导视觉注意偏向到与之匹配的干扰刺激,但无关长时记忆表征并没有表现出类似的注意引导效应;实验2探讨记忆表征由工作记忆系统转移到长时记忆系统的过程中对视觉注意的引导效应,结果发现,随着记忆表征的转移,注意引导效应消失了,实验3排除工作记忆表征的干扰后,依然没有发现无关长时记忆表征对注意的引导效应。以上结果表明,无关长时记忆表征并不能像工作记忆表征一样引导视觉注意选择,工作记忆表征和长时记忆表征对视觉注意的引导属于两个不同的认知过程。     

相似性信息的激活对情境性表征影响的年龄差异

使用视觉搜索范式研究了6岁、9岁、12岁和成人,在限时和不限时呈现材料条件下对实物图形的视觉搜索及再认。结果表明:1)限时和不限时视觉搜索任务方式对视觉搜索和再认的准确性、反应时均有显著影响。2)视觉搜索和再认的准确性随被试年龄的增长而提高,反应时则随其年龄增长而缩短。3)靶项目是否作为搜索项目出现对视觉搜索和再认的准确性没有显著影响,但对视觉搜索和再认的反应时有显著影响,靶项目的出现使视觉搜索和再认的反应时都显著缩短。4)搜索项性质对视觉搜索和再认的反应时指标有显著影响,但对准确性没有显著影响。     

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。     

来源检测对表象引发的错误记忆的影响

采用“学习-再认”模式,考察来源检测对表象引发的错误记忆的影响。结果发现,在再认任务中,正确再认观察项目与想象项目的反应时差异不显著,但在源检测中,正确再认观察项目显著快于正确再认想象项目; 再认时与源检测时的错误再认率差异不显著,但对想象项目的错误再认率显著高于对观察项目。这表明,表象会导致错误记忆发生,提高来源检测操纵并不能够削弱表象引发的错误记忆。根据研究结果提出“表象激活混淆假设”,认为人们虽然使用表象的信息表征方式,却无法获取与之联系的激活路径,容易混淆表象激活的来源。表象激活混淆是表象引发错误记忆的机制。     

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。     

视觉与言语工作记忆表征对视觉注意的引导

通过三个实验,探讨不同时间进程下视觉和言语工作记忆表征对视觉注意的引导。实验1采用注意引导与注意探测任务同时呈现的范式,探讨不同记忆项与注意项时间间隔(SOA)条件下言语工作记忆表征对视觉注意的引导。结果发现,当SOA较短时言语工作记忆表征对视觉注意有引导效应,而SOA较长时未观察到引导效应;实验2、3采用注意引导任务与注意探测任务分离范式,分别探讨在不同SOA条件下言语和视觉工作记忆表征对视觉注意的引导。结果发现,不同SOA条件下言语和视觉工作记忆表征均能引导视觉注意。研究表明,不同实验范式对言语工作记忆表征对视觉注意的引导有明显影响,视觉比言语工作记忆表征能在更广泛条件下引导视觉注意。     

工作记忆表征的激活与抑制状态对注意引导效应的影响

本研究采用双任务范式, 通过定向遗忘任务操纵工作记忆表征状态, 分别在目标无关和目标相关条件下考察工作记忆激活与抑制状态对视觉搜索早期注意引导效应的影响。实验1与实验2发现当工作记忆表征只可能与视觉搜索分心物匹配时(目标无关条件), 处于激活状态的工作记忆表征会引导视觉注意偏向到与之匹配的分心物, 表现出注意引导效应, 而处于抑制状态的工作记忆表征则没有观察到注意引导效应。实验3与实验4发现, 当工作记忆表征有可能与视觉搜索目标匹配时(目标相关条件), 处于激活状态的工作记忆表征能捕获注意, 而处于抑制状态的工作记忆表征只有与视觉搜索目标匹配时, 才表现出对该搜索目标反应的延迟。这些研究的结果表明(1)处于激活状态的工作记忆表征能有效地引导注意偏向到与之匹配的搜索目标或分心物, 并且这种注意引导效应并未受到抑制动机的影响而被消除或反转; (2)处于抑制状态的工作记忆表征能将抑制状态传递到视觉搜索阶段, 并延迟对与之匹配的搜索目标的反应。     

You’re looking for what? Comparing search for familiar,nameable objects to search for unfamiliar,novel objects

Searching for items in one’s environment often includes considerable reliance on semantic knowledge. The present study examines the importance of semantic information in visual and memory search, especially with respect to whether the items reside in long-term or working memory. In Experiment 1, participants engaged in hybrid visual memory search for items that were either highly familiar or novel. Importantly, the relatively large number of targets in this hybrid search task necessitated that targets be stored in some form of long-term memory. We found that search for familiar objects was more efficient than search for novel objects. In Experiment 2, we investigated search for familiar versus novel objects when the number of targets was low enough to be stored in working memory. We also manipulated how often participants in Experiment 2 were required to update their target (every trial vs. every block) in order to control for target templates that were stored in long-term memory as a result of repeated exposure over trials. We found no differences in search efficiency for familiar versus novel objects when templates were stored in working memory. Our results suggest that while semantic information may provide additional individuating features that are useful for object recognition in hybrid search, this information could be irrelevant or even distracting when searching for targets stored in working memory.     

Strategic and automatic effects of visual working memory on attention in visual search

Previous research indicates that visual attention can be automatically captured by sensory inputs that match the contents of visual working memory. However, Woodman and Luck (2007) showed that information in working memory can be used flexibly as a template for either selection or rejection according to task demands. We report two experiments that extend their work. Participants performed a visual search task while maintaining items in visual working memory. Memory items were presented for either a short or long exposure duration immediately prior to the search task. Memory was tested by a change-detection task immediately afterwards. On a random half of trials items in memory matched either one distractor in the search task (Experiment 1) or three (Experiment 2). The main result was that matching distractors speeded or slowed target detection depending on whether memory items were presented for a long or short duration. These effects were more in evidence with three matching distractors than one. We conclude that the influence of visual working memory on visual search is indeed flexible but is not solely a function of task demands. Our results suggest that attentional capture by perceptual inputs matching information in visual working memory involves a fast automatic process that can be overridden by a slower top-down process of attentional avoidance.     

工作记忆表征精度加工需求对注意引导的影响

采用注意捕获范式, 通过行为和事件相关脑电位(ERP)实验, 探讨工作记忆表征精度加工需求对注意引导的影响, 行为结果发现, 在低精度加工需求条件下, 只有一个工作记忆表征引导注意, 且处于高激活状态的工作记忆表征产生的注意捕获大于低激活状态; 而在高精度加工需求条件下, 有两个工作记忆表征引导注意, 且处于高、低激活状态的工作记忆表征产生的注意捕获没有差异。ERP结果显示, 高精度加工需求条件下诱发的NSW和LPC大于低精度加工需求条件; 在高精度加工需求条件下, 干扰项与记忆项匹配比不匹配时, 诱发更大的N2和更小的N2pc, 而在低精度加工需求条件下, 干扰项与记忆项匹配和不匹配时诱发的N2、N2pc没有差异。研究表明, 工作记忆表征精度加工需求影响注意引导的机制可能是高精度加工需求下, 工作记忆表征消耗的认知资源增加, 搜索目标获得的资源减少, 干扰项捕获的注意增加。     

Cognitive control over working memory biases of selection

Across many studies, researchers have found that representations in working memory (WM) can guide visual attention toward items that match the features of the WM contents. While some researchers have contended that this occurs involuntarily, others have suggested that the impact of WM contents on attention can be strategically controlled. Here, we varied the probability that WM items would coincide with either targets or distractors in a visual search task to examine (1) whether participants could intentionally enhance or inhibit the influence of WM items on attention and (2) whether cognitive control over WM biases would also affect access to the memory contents in a surprise recognition test. We found visual search to be faster when the WM item coincided with the search target, and this effect was enhanced when the memory item reliably predicted the location of the target. Conversely, visual search was slowed when the memory item coincided with a search distractor, and this effect was diminished, but not abolished, when the memory item was reliably associated with distractors. This strategic dampening of the influence of WM items on attention came at a price to memory, however, as participants were slowest to perform WM recognition tests on blocks in which the WM contents were consistently invalid. These results document that attentional capture by WM contents is partly, but not fully, malleable by top-down control, which appears to adjust the state of the WM contents to optimize search behavior. These data illustrate the role of cognitive control in modulating the strength of WM biases of selection, and they support a tight coupling between WM and attention.     

Concurrent guidance of attention by multiple working memory items: Behavioral and computational evidence

During visual search, task-relevant representations in visual working memory (VWM), known as attentional templates, are assumed to guide attention. A current debate concerns whether only one (Single-Item-Template hypothesis; SIT) or multiple (Multiple-Item-Template hypothesis; MIT) items can serve as attentional templates simultaneously. The current study was designed to test these two hypotheses. Participants memorized two colors, prior to a visual-search task in which the target and the distractor could match or not match the colors held in VWM. Robust attentional guidance was observed when one of the memory colors was presented as the target (reduced response times (RTs) on target-match trials) or the distractor (increased RTs on distractor-match trials). We constructed two drift-diffusion models that implemented the MIT and SIT hypotheses, which are similar in their predictions about overall RTs, but differ in their predictions about RTs on individual trials. Critically, simulated RT distributions and error rates revealed a better match of the MIT hypothesis to the observed data than the SIT hypothesis. Taken together, our findings provide behavioral and computational evidence for the concurrent guidance of attention by multiple items in VWM.

     

Distractor devaluation requires visual working memory

Visual stimuli seen previously as distractors in a visual search task are subsequently evaluated more negatively than those seen as targets. An attentional inhibition account for this distractor-devaluation effect posits that associative links between attentional inhibition and to-be-ignored stimuli are established during search, stored, and then later reinstantiated, implying that distractor devaluation may require visual working memory (WM) resources. To assess this, we measured distractor devaluation with and without a concurrent visual WM load. Participants viewed a memory array, performed a simple search task, evaluated one of the search items (or a novel item), and then viewed a memory test array. Although distractor devaluation was observed with low (and no) WM load, it was absent when WM load was increased. This result supports the notions that active association of current attentional states with stimuli requires WM and that memory for these associations plays a role in affective response.     

基于记忆的注意捕获和注意抑制效应：ERP证据

采用工作记忆与视觉搜索双任务范式, 通过操作匹配试次出现概率来诱发不同水平的认知控制动机, 考察了基于记忆的注意引导过程的时程特点。结果：记忆匹配刺激首先诱发了N2pc成分, 随后诱发了与抑制过程相关的差异正波。并且, 认知控制动机水平越高, N2pc波幅越小、潜伏期越短; 抑制性差异正波波幅越大。结论：基于记忆的注意引导过程包括早期的注意捕获和后期的注意抑制两个阶段; 其效应量和时程受到认知控制动机水平的调节。     

工作记忆表征引导视觉注意选择的眼动研究

工作记忆表征能否引导视觉注意选择？目前实验结果尚不一致。有研究者认为能否观察到注意引导效应取决于视觉搜索类型。研究采用工作记忆任务与视觉搜索任务相结合的双任务范式, 结合眼动追踪技术, 对不同视觉搜索类型下的注意引导效应进行验证。实验1结果发现, 不管视觉搜索任务的靶子是否变化, 在早期的眼动指标上都发现了显著的注意引导效应, 但注意引导效应在靶子固定的视觉搜索任务下表现得更强。实验2在平衡两种视觉搜索任务中的工作记忆负载后发现, 两种视觉搜索任务下都出现了显著的注意引导效应, 但没有发现实验1中所出现的任务间差异。实验结果否定了视觉搜索类型对注意引导效应的决定性影响, 同时也提示工作记忆负载可能在注意引导效应中起重要作用。     

无关工作记忆表征的负性情绪信息能否捕获视觉注意?一项眼动研究

研究通过分析视觉搜索任务的首次注视点和行为反应时, 探讨无关工作记忆表征的负性情绪信息对视觉注意选择的影响。实验1发现在反映早期注意选择的首次注视点百分率指标上, 不管工作记忆表征的情绪效价如何, 均出现了显著的注意捕获效应; 实验2发现当采用中性情绪靶子刺激时, 首次注视点百分率指标上仍表现出了稳健的注意捕获效应; 在首次注视点持续时间指标上, 实验1和实验2均发现记忆匹配条件的干扰刺激显著小于控制条件的干扰刺激, 表现出注意的快速脱离; 而在行为反应时指标上, 早期的注意捕获效应消失(实验1), 甚至被反转为注意抑制效应(实验2)。这些结果表明在早期注意选择阶段, 记忆驱动的注意捕获效应不受工作记忆表征情绪效价的影响, 但认知控制会在早期注意捕获之后促使注意快速脱离记忆匹配的干扰刺激, 其作用效果受靶子刺激情绪效价的调节。