Please wait a minute...
心理学报
  论文 本期目录 | 过刊浏览 | 高级检索 |
视觉工作记忆中特征绑定关系的记忆机制
薛成波;叶超雄;张引;刘强
(辽宁师范大学脑与认知神经科学研究中心, 大连 116029)
Memory Mechanism of Feature Binding in Visual Working Memory
XUE ChengBo; YE ChaoXiong; ZHANG Yin; LIU Qiang
(Research Center of Brain and Cognitive Neuroscience, Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, China)
全文: PDF(417 KB)   评审附件 (1 KB) 
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      
摘要 

弱客体理论认为, 视觉工作记忆系统是由众多特征存储的子系统组成, 不同纬度的特征独立存储在相应的有限容量的子系统中, 相互之间不会竞争记忆资源。而对于特征之间绑定关系的记忆存在不同的观点。一种观点认为绑定关系的记忆需要注意维持, 因此绑定关系的记忆会占用到特征记忆的资源; 另一种观点认为绑定关系的记忆是自动发生的, 不需要注意的维持。本实验的目的是探究特征绑定关系的记忆是否是自动发生的。在实验中, 我们设计了两种任务, 一种任务是只记忆颜色, 另一种任务是记忆颜色跟位置及其之间的绑定关系, 并测试分析视觉工作记忆相关的ERP成分CDA。结果发现两种任务条件下的CDA波幅之间没有显著差异, 说明视觉工作记忆中的特征绑定是自动发生的。

服务
把本文推荐给朋友
加入引用管理器
E-mail Alert
RSS
作者相关文章
薛成波
叶超雄
张引
刘强
关键词 视觉工作记忆弱客体理论特征绑定注意CDA    
Abstract

A weak object-based theory considers visual working memory to be made up of many subsystems. Rather than competing for memory resources, this theory suggests that information about different feature dimensions is stored in independent subsystems that each has a limited capacity of memory resource.In addition to describing the storage capacity limitations of different feature dimensions, supporters of weak object-based theory also argue that the binding between features can itself be a dimension of information to be stored. There remains controversy concerning whether the storage of binding information is processed automatically and whether it needs attentional resources. Treisman et al. (2002) suggested that binding in visual memory might require attention to be focused on maintaining the links between features during the delay. Similarly feature-integration theory proposes that, when multiple objects are present, focused attention is required to correctly bind features for initial perception. In contrast, Allen et al. (2006) by adding a digit-span task, explored whether feature binding required additional resources. They found that memory for bound conditions did not require more attention than memory for single feature conditions, and suggested that binding in itself did not require attentional resources. To examine whether or not binding needs attentional resources we measured participants’ ERPs in two conditions. In the single feature condition participants were required to judge whether the color of objects had changed from the initial display. On change trials, the objects occupied the same position but one item had changed to a new color that had not appeared in the initial display.In the feature binding condition, on no-change trials, participants had to judge both whether the color and the location in the test display had changed from the initial display. For change trials, the colors of any two objects exchanged position so that the relationship between colorand location changed for two objects. We compared the amplitude differences between the two conditions in the Contralateral Delay Activity (CDA) component of ERP data, to examine whether feature binding required attention. Accuracy for each condition was greater than 75% and there wereno significant behavioral differences between the single feature condition and the binding condition.Importantly, the ERP resultsalso showedno significantdifferences inamplitude across the two conditions. There was a significant main effect of set size. There were equal amplitudes for 3 items and 4 items, but amplitudes were significantly larger for both 3 and 4 item than for 2 items. At the same time, there was no significant interaction between condition and number of items. All of the results support the hypothesis that no additional memory resources are required to store the binding between two features (color and position of an item) compared to those required to store a single feature (color). These results confirm that the binding relationship needs no attention resources. We take the result to be evidence of a relatively automatic visual feature binding mechanism in working memory.

Key wordsvisual working memory    weak object-based theory    feature binding    attention    CDA
收稿日期: 2014-10-09      出版日期: 2015-07-25
基金资助:

国家自然科学基金面上项目(31170982)、辽宁省高等学校杰出青年成长计划项目(LJQ2014116)。

通讯作者: 刘强, E-mail: lq780614@163.com   
引用本文:   
薛成波;叶超雄;张引;刘强. 视觉工作记忆中特征绑定关系的记忆机制[J]. 心理学报, 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2015.00851.
XUE ChengBo; YE ChaoXiong; ZHANG Yin; LIU Qiang. Memory Mechanism of Feature Binding in Visual Working Memory. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2015, 47(7): 851-858.
链接本文:  
http://journal.psych.ac.cn/xlxb/CN/10.3724/SP.J.1041.2015.00851      或      http://journal.psych.ac.cn/xlxb/CN/Y2015/V47/I7/851
[1] 李腾飞, 马 楠, 胡中华, 刘 强.  空间距离对视觉工作记忆巩固的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2017, 49(6): 711-722.
[2] 孙悦亮;郑伟意;何先友. 纯小数加工的心理机制:选择通达还是平行通达?[J]. 心理学报, 2017, 49(5): 611-621.
[3] 胡岑楼;张豹;黄赛. 无关长时记忆表征能否引导视觉注意选择?[J]. 心理学报, 2017, 49(5): 590-601.
[4] 孙俊才; 石荣. 哭泣表情面孔的注意偏向:眼动的证据[J]. 心理学报, 2017, 49(2): 155-163.
[5] 于薇;王爱君;张明. 集中和分散注意对多感觉整合中听觉主导效应的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2017, 49(2): 164-173.
[6] 张豹;胡岑楼;黄赛. 认知控制在工作记忆表征引导注意中的作用:来自眼动的证据[J]. 心理学报, 2016, 48(9): 1105-1118.
[7] 刘丽;白学军. 注意控制定势和线索类型在注意捕获中的作用[J]. 心理学报, 2016, 48(9): 1093-1104.
[8] 王慧媛; 隋洁; 张明. 线索靶子关联和搜索策略对注意捕获的作用 ——来自意义线索的证据[J]. 心理学报, 2016, 48(7): 783-793.
[9] 刘芳; 丁锦红; 张钦. 高、低趋近积极情绪对不同注意加工阶段的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2016, 48(7): 794-803.
[10] 谢和平;王福兴;周宗奎;吴鹏. 多媒体学习中线索效应的元分析[J]. 心理学报, 2016, 48(5): 540-555.
[11] 李秀君;石文典. 选择性注意对听觉内隐学习的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2016, 48(3): 221-229.
[12] 贾磊;张常洁;张庆林. 情绪性注意瞬脱的认知机制:来自行为与ERP的证据[J]. 心理学报, 2016, 48(2): 174-184.
[13] 白学军; 刘丽; 宋娟; 郭志英. 特征和位置信息在价值驱动注意捕获中的作用[J]. 心理学报, 2016, 48(11): 1357-1369.
[14] 胡艳梅;张明. 基于记忆的注意捕获和注意抑制效应:ERP证据[J]. 心理学报, 2016, 48(1): 12-21.
[15] 张豹;邵嘉莹;胡岑楼;黄赛. 工作记忆表征的激活与抑制状态对注意引导效应的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2015, 47(9): 1089-1100.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
版权所有 © 《心理学报》编辑部
本系统由北京玛格泰克科技发展有限公司设计开发  技术支持:support@magtech.com.cn