ISSN 0439-755X
CN 11-1911/B
主办:中国心理学会
   中国科学院心理研究所
出版:科学出版社

心理学报 ›› 2015, Vol. 47 ›› Issue (9): 1101-1110.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2015.01101

• 论文 • 上一篇    下一篇

回想、熟悉性与启动在编码过程的认知神经机制

叶晓红1,2;陈幼贞2;孟迎芳2   

  1.  (1三明学院教育与音乐学院, 福建 三明 365004)(2福建师范大学心理系, 福州 350007)
  • 收稿日期:2014-11-18 出版日期:2015-09-25 发布日期:2015-09-25
  • 通讯作者: 孟迎芳, E-mail: 175695016@qq.com
  • 基金资助:

    福建省自然科学基金计划项目(2014J05038), 三明学院科学研究发展基金项目(A201319/Q)资助。

Neural Processing of Recollection, Familiarity and Priming at Encoding

YE Xiaohong1,2; CHEN Youzhen2; MENG Yingfang2   

  1. (1 School of Education and Music, Sanming University, Sanming 365004, China)  (2 Department of Psychology, Fujian Normal University, Fuzhou 350007, China)
  • Received:2014-11-18 Online:2015-09-25 Published:2015-09-25
  • Contact: MENG Yingfang, E-mail: 175695016@qq.com

摘要:

为了探究基于回想和熟悉性的外显记忆及基于启动的内隐记忆在编码阶段的认知加工差异, 该文采用事件相关电位(ERP)技术, 并结合迫选再认测验和相继记忆(Dm)范式, 把学习项目分为四类:随后记住、随后知道、随后启动及随后忘记。结果表明, 与启动关联的Dm效应表现在刺激后700 ms开始的中央区, 随后启动比随后忘记更为负走向, 即负走向的Dm效应; 与回想关联的Dm效应表现为从400 ms开始的右前额区正走向Dm效应以及800 ms开始的枕区负走向Dm效应, 而与熟悉性关联的Dm效应表现在300~400 ms的前额区及500~600 ms的顶区正走向Dm效应。为了进一步确定这些Dm效应与不同记忆类型的关联, 第二个实验中在编码阶段同时设置了干扰任务, 以探究编码干扰下Dm效应的变化, 结果发现, 在编码干扰的作用下, 与启动关联的中央区负走向Dm效应仍有存在, 而与两种外显记忆:回想和熟悉性关联的Dm效应发生了不同的变化, 即在编码干扰下并未发现任何与回想关联的Dm效应, 但与熟悉性关联的正走向Dm效应仍有存在, 主要表现在600~800 ms的右侧额区。综合这些结果, 表明回想、熟悉性与启动在编码阶段的脑机制应该存在着分离的现象。

关键词: 回想, 熟悉性, 内隐记忆, 外显记忆, Dm效应

Abstract:

 

The distinction between neural mechanisms of explicit and implicit expressions of memory has been well studied at the retrieval stage, but less at encoding. Several studies employed a novel paradigm to measure explicit memory and priming-without-explicit memory in one test, and contrasted the neural signals of these two processes at the encoding stage via a Dm analysis. However, dissociations obtained in these studies are complicated because of the contamination from familiarity, a fast automatic process in which memory judgments can be driven by the increased fluency of reprocessing studied information. Familiarity is also a form of explicit memory but different from recollection. Growing evidence has indicated that familiarity-based recognition judgments might rely on the same process that supports implicit memory or priming. Therefore, it is necessary to concurrently acquire and compare the encoding processes yielding later recollection, familiarity and priming in a single test.
In this study, a two-stage forced-choice recognition test was adopted within the subsequent memory (Dm) paradigm, so as to simultaneously acquire neural correlates of recollection, familiarity and priming in a single test. During the study phase, participants were instructed to judge the color of each word. There were two stages during the forced-choice recognition test phase. In the first stage, two words (one from the study list, and one new) appeared concurrently, and participants were instructed to indicate the studied word. If they could not recognize the studied word, a guess was permitted to make a choice. In the second stage, a cue to make a confidence judgment appeared directly following the recognition response, and participants indicated whether the foregoing studied-selection was based on remembering, knowing or guessing. Here, “remembering” refers to the retrieval of specific details from the study phase supporting the recognition decision, “knowing” refers to the recognition supported by a weak feeling of familiarity with few details retrieved from the study phase, and “guessing” refers to “absolutely no feeling of memory” such that the stimulus in no way felt “old”. The study ERP data were then classified into four categories as “subsequent remembered” (later retrieved with detailed information), “subsequent known” (later retrieved with a feeling of familiarity)”, “subsequent primed” (later retrieved without conscious awareness) and “subsequent forgotten” (not retrieved). Differences in subsequent memory effects (Dm effects) were measured by comparing ERP waveform associated with later memory based on recollection, familiarity or priming with that associated with later forgotten items. In addition, interference during encoding was introduced in Experiment 2 to determine whether three Dm effects were different from Experiment 1. The interference task was to judge the orientation of arrow which appeared with word at the same time.
The results showed that, in Experiment 1, the recollection Dm effect involved a robustly sustained (onset at 400 ms) prefrontal positive-going Dm effect which was right-lateralized, and a later (onset at 800 ms) occipital negative-going Dm effect. Familiarity involved an earlier (300~400 ms) prefrontal positive-going Dm effect and a later (500~600 ms) parietal positive-going Dm effect. Priming involved a negative-going Dm effect which onset at 700 ms, mainly distributed over anterior brain sites. In Experiment 2 with an interference task during encoding, a similar priming Dm effect that was negative-going during 600~800 ms at central site, and a similar familiarity Dm effect that was positive-going during 600~800 ms at frontal site were still observed. However, there was no evidence of Dm effect associated with recollection.

Taken the two ERP results together, we inferred that there would be a sequence of components that represented cognitive processes underlying the encoding of verbal information into episodic memory, and separately supported later remembering, knowing and priming.

Key words: recollection, familiarity, implicit memory, explicit memory, Dm effect