Please wait a minute...
  本期目录 | 过刊浏览 | 高级检索 |
自上而下的目标调节奖赏联结干扰子的注意定向和脱离
张燕,曹慧敏,郑元杰,任衍具
山东师范大学
Top-down goals modulate attentional orienting and disengagement to reward distractors
, , ,
全文: PDF(0 KB)  
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      
摘要 近年来传统的注意控制理论已经无法解释部分注意控制现象, 有研究者提出将奖赏联结/价值驱动的注意捕获作为一种新的注意引导源。奖赏联结的注意捕获是否会受到自上而下的目标定势的调节已成为该领域一个重要的理论问题。研究采用空间线索范式的变式, 探讨了奖赏联结干扰子与目标的相关性对目标定势影响奖赏联结注意捕获中的定向和脱离的调节作用。研究结果发现: 当学习阶段习得的奖赏联结干扰子在测验阶段与目标相关时(实验一), 有奖干扰子相对于无奖干扰子具有优先的注意定向和延迟脱离; 而学习阶段习得的奖赏联结干扰子在测验阶段与目标无关时(实验二), 有奖干扰子和无奖干扰子在注意定向和脱离方面均无显著差异。由此可见, 奖赏联结的注意捕获并不是完全自动化的, 自上而下的目标定势能够调节其注意定向和脱离的成分, 支持奖赏联结的注意捕获与自上而下的目标定势交互引导视觉注意的观点。
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
张燕
曹慧敏
郑元杰
任衍具
关键词 奖赏联结 自上而下 注意定向 注意脱离    
Abstract:The traditional distinction between exogenous and endogenous attentional control has recently been enriched with an additional mode of control, termed as ‘selection history’. Recent findings have indicated that previously rewarded stimuli capture more attention than their physical attributes would predict. However, an important question is whether reward-based learning (or value-driven) attentional control is fully automatic or driven by strategic, top-down control? Most researchers suggest value-driven attentional control is fully automatic, not driven by strategic, top-down control. Although previous studies have explored the phenomenon of value-driven attention capture, few studies have separately discussed the early attentional orienting and the late attentional disengagement in the value-driven attentional control process. Therefore, the present study used a modified spatial cueing paradigm to disentangle attentional orienting and attentional disengagement and manipulated the goal-relevance of reward distractors. In Experiment 1, reward distractors were goal-relevant, and we would expect prioritized orienting to and delayed disengagement from reward distractors (compared with no-reward distractors) to be evident when both were goal-relevant (i.e., part of the target-set); In Experiment 2, reward distractors were not goal-relevant, and we would expect prioritized orienting to and delayed disengagement from reward distractors (compared with no-reward distractors) not to be evident when both were not goal-relevant. We tested 48 participants (Experiment 1: 24; Experiment 2: 24) with normal or corrected-to-normal vision. During the training phase, the four positions in the search display were all circles of different colors (such as red, green, blue, cyan, orange, and yellow). Targets were defined as a red or a green circle, exactly one of which was presented on every trial. Inside the target, a white line segment was oriented either vertically or horizontally, and inside each of the nontargets, a white line segment was tilted at 45° to the left or to the right. The feedback display informed participants of the reward earned (+10, +0) on the previous trial, as well as total reward accumulated thus far. The next trial then started again with the presentation of the fixation display. During the test phase, each trial started with the presentation of the fixation display (900 ms), which was followed immediately by the cue display (100 ms). After the cue display, the fixation display was presented again (100 ms), followed by the target display (100 ms). The target display was followed by a gray screen (until response). The feedback display at test informed participants only whether their response on the previous trial was correct. That is, no reward was provided during the test phase. The next trial then started again with the presentation of the fixation display. Results showed that: (1) Monetary reward had a clear effect on search RT in the training phase. With 48 participants across Experiments 1 and 2, we observed a significant main effect of reward; ( 2) in the test phase in Experiment 1, reward distractor were goal-relevant, and we observed prioritized orienting to and delayed disengagement from rewarded distractors (compared with no-reward distractors) to be evident when both were goal-relevant (i.e., part of the target-set); in Experiment 2, reward distractor were not goal-relevant, and we observed prioritized orienting to and delayed disengagement from reward distractors (compared with no-reward distractors) not to be evident when both were not goal-relevant. The present findings demonstrated that: (1) In the training phase, participants have learned the effect of reward. (2) In the test phase, orienting to and disengagement from rewarded stimuli are driven by strategic, top-down control. These results highlight the role of top-down goals in attentional orienting to and disengagement from rewarded stimuli.
Key wordsreward association    top-down    attentional orienting    attentional disengagement
收稿日期: 2017-06-15      出版日期: 2018-01-08
通讯作者: 任衍具   
引用本文:   
张燕 曹慧敏 郑元杰 任衍具. 自上而下的目标调节奖赏联结干扰子的注意定向和脱离[J]. , .
链接本文:  
http://journal.psych.ac.cn/xlxb/CN/Y/V/I/0
[1] 王佳莹; 缴润凯; 张明. 任务设置影响负相容效应的机制 ——自上而下认知控制对阈下启动信息加工的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2016, 48(11): 1370-1378.
[2] 王爱君;李毕琴;张明. 三维空间深度位置上基于空间的返回抑制[J]. 心理学报, 2015, 47(7): 859-868.
[3] 金熠;张丹丹;柳昀哲;罗跃嘉. 厌恶情绪加工特点的事件相关电位研究[J]. 心理学报, 2014, 46(11): 1682-1690.
[4] 白学军,尹莎莎,杨海波,吕勇,胡伟,罗跃. 视觉工作记忆内容对自上而下注意控制的影响:一项ERP研究[J]. 心理学报, 2011, 43(10): 1103-1113.
[5] 张豹,金志成,陈彩琦. 视觉工作记忆对前注意阶段注意定向的调节[J]. 心理学报, 2008, 40(05): 552-561.
[6]

崔翔宇,许百华

. 预览搜索中基于颜色的两种自上而下加工[J]. 心理学报, 2007, 39(06): 977-984.
[7]

徐岩,周晓林,王玉凤

. 两亚型注意缺陷多动障碍(ADHD)儿童的内隐注意定向[J]. 心理学报, 2006, 38(05): 709-717.
[8] 陈素芬,王甦,周建中. 重复线索化和靶子注意定向对返回抑制的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2002, 34(06): 9-14.
[9] 李晓轩,王甦. 在不同注意定向条件下是否出现返回抑制的知觉优先[J]. 心理学报, 1999, 31(03): 241-248.
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