提取干扰对不同类型内隐记忆的影响

以往研究关于提取阶段的干扰是否会影响内隐记忆存在着异义, 其中一个重要因素可能源于所采用的内隐记忆测验类型的差异。本研究采用学习-测验范式, 通过4个实验, 分别考察了提取干扰对识别式知觉内隐测验、识别式概念内隐测验、产生式知觉内隐测验和产生式概念内隐测验的影响, 以期对提取干扰和内隐记忆之间的关系有着更全面的了解。结果表明: (1)词汇判断任务(识别式知觉)和语义分类任务(识别式概念)的启动效应在提取干扰下消失了, (2)而产生式词汇判断任务(产生式知觉)和产生式语义分类任务(产生式概念)在提取干扰下仍发现了明显的启动效应, 但与无干扰条件相比, 启动效应量也有着明显的减少。由此可见, 不同类型的内隐记忆都会受到提取干扰的影响, 相比于产生式启动, 识别式启动更容易受到提取干扰的破坏。     

提取干扰对内隐记忆的影响

以往研究多认同内隐记忆不会受到干扰的影响,但主要集中于编码时的干扰不会影响随后的内隐记忆提取成绩,而对于提取时的干扰是否也不会影响内隐记忆成绩仍存在疑义。该文在实验1采用学习-测验范式,通过在提取阶段设置同时干扰任务进一步考察提取干扰与内隐记忆的关系,结果表明提取干扰下并未发现明显的启动效应,即提取干扰破坏了内隐记忆。为进一步探讨内隐记忆的提取干扰效应是否源于记忆与干扰刺激同时呈现所引起的知觉表征竞争,实验2改变了记忆与干扰刺激的呈现顺序,结果表明不论干扰刺激在记忆项目之前或之后呈现,启动效应均受到影响。相比之下,提取干扰对再认成绩的影响并不明显(实验3)。上述结果表明,内隐记忆的提取干扰效应是源于一般认知资源的竞争,在提取过程中任何能够产生认知资源竞争的变量设置都可能会削减内隐测验中的启动效应。     

干扰刺激类型对内隐记忆提取干扰的调节

为了探讨内隐记忆提取干扰效应是否敏于注意资源的变化,该实验沿用前期经典的“学习-测验”范式,通过在提取阶段同时设置两种不同刺激类型的干扰任务:箭头干扰和汉字干扰,以此来探讨内隐记忆提取干扰效应的本质所在。结果发现,不同提取干扰条件对内隐记忆产生不同程度的影响,汉字干扰对内隐记忆的影响比箭头产生的干扰更大。结果表明,干扰刺激类型会调节内隐记忆提取干扰效应的大小,证实内隐记忆提取干扰敏于注意资源的变化。     

汉字的反知觉干扰效应:来自ERP的证据

采用"学习-测验"范式,在知觉辨认测验(内隐测验)和再认测验(外显测验)中,用事件相关电位探索汉字内隐、外显记忆的"知觉干扰效应"。结果:行为上,内隐记忆不受知觉干扰条件的影响;外显记忆受知觉干扰条件影响而显著降低;脑电上,内隐测验两种条件的ERP无显著差异;外显测验在550～600ms,知觉干扰条件比无干扰条件诱发了更负的ERP。实验在行为和脑电水平上都表现出内隐、外显记忆的分离,出现汉字的"反知觉干扰效应"。     

内隐与外显记忆重复学习效果的比较研究

实验采用重学—分离设计 ,分别用知觉辨认和再认测验作为内隐、外显测量的测验方法 ,比较重学—启动测验的结果与重学—再认的结果 ,发现 :重学和间接测量的结合能有效地揭示内隐记忆的叠加现象 ;一次重学能使知觉启动测验的成绩产生明显的叠加效应 ;高意识水平学习后 ,低意识水平的重复学习不能改变外显测验成绩持续下降的趋势。     

编码与提取干扰对内隐和外显记忆的非对称性影响

以往研究表明在外显记忆中,编码与提取加工存在着非对称性,但在内隐记忆中,二者的关系并不明确,因此实验采用“学习-再认”范式,考察在编码或提取中分别附加的干扰任务对词汇判断或再认产生的影响。结果证实编码与提取干扰对内隐或外显记忆都具有非对称性的影响,但又存在着差异,即编码干扰会导致随后外显记忆成绩显著减少,而提取干扰对其影响较小,相反,编码干扰对随后内隐测验中启动效应的影响较小,但提取干扰会破坏启动效应,从而为内隐记忆和外显记忆的分离提供了进一步的证据     

字表法定向遗忘对内隐记忆测验的影响

字表法定向遗忘是否影响内隐记忆测验,一直是记忆心理学家关注的焦点.本研究选取低频词语作为实验材料,引入指示符变量(记住、遗忘).以词干回忆和词干补笔分别作为外显和内隐记忆测验,考察字表法定向遗忘对内隐记忆测验的影响.结果发现:(1)内隐和外显记忆测验中都出现了显著的字表法定向遗忘效应;(2)字表法定向遗忘效应的机制应该是提取抑制,即要求遗忘的项目在提取时受到抑制而使记住项目的成绩更为突出,而不是偏好对记住项目复述的结果.     

记忆分离研究的新发展

内隐记忆是从记忆测验中分离出来,相对于外显记忆而言的一种新的测量记忆的手段,近年来,一直吸引着众多研究者的兴趣,他们运用多种方法,从不同角度进行实验探索,观点虽众说纷纭,却促进了记忆分离研究的不断发展。Warrington 和Weiskrants(1970)通过对健忘症患者的研究发现,这些患者尽管在自由回忆、线索回忆、再认等直接测验中的成绩受损,但在词干补笔、知觉辨认等时间测验中表现出与正常人一样的启动效应。Light 和Singh(1987)的研究证实,年轻人在回忆与再认中的成绩明显高于老年组,但两组被试在完形与知觉识别中成绩相同。后     

知觉启动效应及其脑机制的研究进展

启动效应是内隐记忆研究的主要对象,人们认为至少存在着两种类型的启动效应——知觉启动和概念启动。知觉启动被认为主要反应对刺激形式的优先加工,概念启动被认为主要反应对刺激意义的优先加工。通常被认为具有知觉特征的启动任务有：阈下呈现的单词识别,词干补笔,残词补笔,和图片命名等。     

知觉启动效应及其脑机制的研究进展

启动效应是内隐记忆研究的主要对象,人们认为至少存在着两种类型的启动效应——知觉启动和概念启动。知觉启动被认为主要反应对刺激形式的优先加工,概念启动被认为主要反应对刺激意义的优先加工。通常被认为具有知觉特征的启动任务有：阈下呈现的单词识别,词干补笔,残词补笔,和图片命名等。     

任务转换中惯性激活对内隐记忆的影响：来自ERPs的证据

以往研究认为内隐记忆具有不受干扰影响的自动化加工特征,其证据主要来自于对内隐记忆编码过程的研究。最近已有多项研究发现,内隐记忆受提取过程中的干扰影响,但对这一现象的产生机制目前仍尚无定论。本研究根据任务转换相关理论,通过将go/no-go范式引入干扰任务,探讨提取过程中前置干扰对内隐记忆产生影响的内在机制。结果表明,前置的干扰任务产生惯性激活时,后续的内隐记忆任务会受到影响,即启动效应降低。对惯性激活进行抑制后,随后的内隐记忆则不受影响。并且,在内隐记忆相关的N400成分上得到了与行为数据一致的结果,即在no-go干扰下,获得的N400新旧效应,在go干扰下却未被发现。研究结果证明,提取干扰对内隐记忆的影响主要由干扰任务与内隐记忆任务对认知资源的竞争导致。     

Attention and implicit memory in the category-verification and lexical decision tasks

Prior research on implicit memory appeared to support 3 generalizations: Conceptual tests are affected by divided attention, perceptual tasks are affected by certain divided-attention manipulations, and all types of priming are affected by selective attention. These generalizations are challenged in experiments using the implicit tests of category verification and lexical decision. First, both tasks were unaffected by divided-attention tasks known to impact other priming tasks. Second, both tasks were unaffected by a manipulation of selective attention in which colored words were either named or their colors identified. Thus, category verification, unlike other conceptual tasks, appears unaffected by divided attention, and some selective-attention tasks, and lexical decision, unlike other perceptual tasks, appears unaffected by a difficult divided-attention task and some selective-attention tasks. Finally, both tasks were affected by a selective-attention task in which attention was manipulated across objects (rather than within objects), indicating some susceptibility to selective attention. The results contradict an analysis on the basis of the conceptual-perceptual distinction and other more specific hypotheses but are consistent with the distinction between production and identification priming.     

非熟练中—英双语者跨语言长时重复启动效应

采用跨语言长时重复启动研究范式进一步探讨非熟练中－英双语者的记忆表征模型。被试为华南师范大学大一本科生共140名。实验自变量是语言条件（同语言和跨语言）和学习状况（学习过的和未学习过的）,实验因变量是单词判断的反应时和正确率。实验1中被试在学习和测验阶段都完成概念任务,结果表明获得了跨语言长时重复启动效应。实验2中被试在学习和测验阶段完成词汇任务,结果表明没有获得跨语言长时重复启动效应。实验3中被试在学习阶段完成概念任务,在测验阶段完成词汇任务,结果表明没有获得跨语言长时重复启动效应。实验4中在学习阶段的概念任务中呈现汉语单字词,在测验阶段的词汇任务中呈现英语翻译对等词,结果表明没有获得跨语言长时重复启动效应。总的实验结果表明,在基于内隐记忆的跨语言重复启动的范式下,非熟练中－英双语者的记忆表征支持概念表征共享、词汇表征分离的观点。更重要的是,非熟练中－英双语者需要经由汉语翻译对等词的词汇表征,才能通达英语单词的概念表征,支持了词汇连接模型的观点     

概念内隐记忆中的注意促进效应

Swallow和Jiang (2010)最早发现, 编码时的目标探测会促进同时呈现的背景信息在随后记忆测验中的表现, 并将这一现象称为注意促进效应(Attentional Boost Effect, ABE)。随后研究发现这一现象并不会出现在概念内隐测验中, 由此提出目标探测主要促进的是背景信息的知觉加工, 而非语义加工。本研究通过3个实验, 操纵了对背景信息的编码加工类型(知觉加工或概念加工)。结果发现, 当与目标探测同时进行的是对背景信息的概念加工任务, 则ABE会出现在随后的概念内隐测验中。反之, 当对背景信息进行的是知觉加工任务时, 则ABE会出现在随后的知觉内隐测验而不是概念内隐测验中。这些结果表明, 目标探测既可能促进背景信息的知觉加工, 也可能促进背景信息的语义加工, 但只有在目标探测下背景信息的编码加工与随后内隐测验中所依赖的提取加工具有一致性, 才会产生ABE。     

联想启动与知觉启动的比较研究

采用快速命名方法探讨不同加工水平对联想启动效应的影响。被试分别在深、浅加工条件下学习一系列颜色词,然后完成颜色命名和再认任务,并设立词命名任务,以比较联想启动和知觉启动的异同。结果表明,在颜色命名任务中,深、浅加工条件下均可形成对颜色词的启动效应,但浅加工条件下的再认成绩明显低于深加工,出现了联想启动和再认的分离现象。词命名表现出与颜色命名相似的结果,但它们在有意识回忆方面仍存在一定的差异,提示知觉表征系统单独并不能支持联想启动,联想启动可能是多个记忆系统共同作用的结果。     

Measuring automatic retrieval in a conceptual priming task

The speeded response technique has demonstrated that priming in perceptual memory tasks can occur through automatic retrieval that is uncontaminated by conscious retrieval (pure automatic retrieval). This work assesses whether priming in a conceptual task (category exemplar generation) can occur through pure automatic retrieval using the same technique. Automatic retrieval estimates obtained using the speeded response technique were compared to those obtained using more traditional measures (implicit memory and process dissociation procedure [PDP]). Similar estimates of automatic retrieval were obtained for speeded, implicit, and PDP groups following shallow processing. However, higher estimates of automatic retrieval were obtained following deep processing in the speeded and implicit conditions compared to the PDP condition. Advantages for using the speeded response technique to index automatic memory are discussed.     

Levels of processing effects on implicit and explicit memory tasks: using question position to investigate the lexical-processing hypothesis

One interpretation of levels of processing effects (LOP) on priming in implicit tests of memory is in terms of deficits in lexical processing during shallow study tasks. In two experiments the extent of lexical processing engaged in during standard shallow encoding tasks was manipulated by placing the encoding question either before or after the target stimulus. Clear evidence was found in explicit memory tasks that placing the question after the target stimulus increased the depth of processing of words presented in shallow encoding tasks. In contrast, there was no evidence of such an effect on the priming observed in implicit memory tasks. The results suggest that the role of lexical processing in LOP effects on priming requires further specification.     

The fate of originally presented surface information following recall errors in sentence memory tasks

Pictures are remembered better than their names. This picture superiority effect in episodic memory has been attributed either to the greater sensory distinctiveness of pictures or to their greater conceptual distinctiveness. Weldon and Coyote (1996) tested the conceptual distinctiveness hypothesis by comparing how well pictures as opposed to words primed in two conceptual implicit memory tasks (category production and word association). They found no picture superiority in priming and concluded that the basis of the picture superiority effect must then be pictures' greater sensory distinctiveness. Using the same logic, we compared how well pictures as opposed to words primed in a perceptual implicit memory task (picture and word fragment identification). The sensory distinctiveness theory would predict that pictures should prime picture fragment identification better than words prime word fragment identification, a result we call the picture superiority in within-form priming. Across three experiments which manipulated the encoding task at study, only one showed picture superiority in within-form priming. In contrast, in all three experiments there was robust picture superiority in recall, and exposure to pictures and words at study and test produced independent effects in which both study and test exposure to pictures was more effective for recall than exposure to words. We consider how these results might be reconciled by differences in retrieval demands between recall and fragment identification.