行为振荡的Theta节律存在于跨通道刺激冲突与反应冲突加工中

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1041.2026.0467

心理学报 ›› 2026, Vol. 58 ›› Issue (3): 467-479.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2026.0467 cstr: 32110.14.2026.0467

行为振荡的Theta节律存在于跨通道刺激冲突与反应冲突加工中

许红慧¹^,²^,³, 徐怡冉⁴, 杨国春⁵, 南威治⁶, 刘勋¹^,²()

¹中国科学院心理研究所行为科学重点实验室, 北京 100101
²中国科学院大学心理学系, 北京 100049
³中南民族大学教育学院, 武汉 430074
⁴湖北艺术职业学院文化服务与管理学院, 武汉 430079
⁵广东省智能科学与技术研究院, 珠海 519031
⁶广州大学教育学院心理系/脑与认知科学中心, 广州 510006

收稿日期:2025-05-15 发布日期:2025-12-26 出版日期:2026-03-25
通讯作者: 刘勋, E-mail: liux@psych.ac.cn
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金中德重大国际合作项目(62061136001/DFG TRR-169);国家自然科学基金中德重大国际合作项目(project B4);中南民族大学中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金(37301/CZQ25016)

Behavioral theta oscillations in cross-modal stimulus conflict and response conflict processing

XU Honghui¹^,²^,³, XU Yiran⁴, YANG Guochun⁵, NAN Weizhi⁶, LIU Xun¹^,²()

¹CAS Key Laboratory of Behavioral Science, Institute of Psychology, Beijing 100101, China
²Department of Psychology, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100040, China
³School of Education, South-Central Minzu University, Wuhan 430074, China
⁴School of Cultural Services and Management, Hubei Vocational College of Art, Wuhan 430079, China
⁵Guangdong Institute of Intelligence Science and Technology, Hengqin, Zhuhai 519031, China
⁶Department of Psychology and Center for Brain and Cognitive Sciences, School of Education, Guangzhou University, Guangzhou 510006, China

Received:2025-05-15 Online:2025-12-26 Published:2026-03-25

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

Theta振荡与认知控制密切相关。以往研究发现theta振荡参与跨通道刺激冲突与反应冲突的加工, 然而, theta振荡与跨通道刺激冲突和反应冲突程度之间的关系目前仍不清楚。本研究采用视听Stroop任务, 结合具有高时间分辨率的行为采样方法对该问题进行探究。结果表明大脑对任务相关通道刺激的加工节律受任务无关通道刺激的影响。当任务无关刺激与任务相关刺激相同或冲突时, 大脑对任务相关刺激的加工节律为theta; 当任务无关刺激为中性刺激时, 大脑则以alpha节律加工任务相关刺激。此外, 研究发现, 在听觉任务中, 反应冲突幅度在视听刺激呈现时间间隔(Stimulus Onset Asynchrony, SOA)上表现出theta振荡; 在视觉任务中, 刺激冲突幅度在SOA上表现出theta振荡。当前结果表明冲突加工在行为上表现出节律性, 揭示了theta振荡与冲突幅度之间的关系, 将注意的节律性理论扩展到认知控制的冲突加工领域。

关键词: 跨通道, 刺激冲突, 反应冲突, 行为振荡, Theta

Abstract:

Theta oscillations are closely associated with cognitive control. Accumulating evidence indicates their involvement in processing both cross-modal stimulus conflict and response conflict. However, the relationship between theta oscillations and the magnitude of these conflicts remains unclear. Research on behavioral oscillations, which shows that theta rhythms are linked to periodic patterns in behavioral performance, provides a novel perspective for investigating how theta oscillations are related to the magnitude of cross-modal stimulus conflict and response conflict.

To address this issue, we used an audiovisual Stroop task with a 2-to-1 stimulus-response mapping and a time-resolved behavioral approach. Given previous evidence that sensory modality modulates theta oscillations during cross-modal stimulus conflict and response conflict processing, we conducted two experiments. In Experiment 1 (N = 43), participants responded to auditory stimuli while ignoring visual distractors (auditory task). In Experiment 2 (N = 40), participants responded to visual stimuli while ignoring auditory distractors (visual task). This design allowed us to investigate the relationship between theta oscillations and the magnitude of cross-modal stimulus and response conflicts in the auditory and visual tasks, respectively.

The results demonstrated that the rhythmic processing of task-relevant stimuli was modulated by task-irrelevant stimuli. When the task-irrelevant stimuli were either the same as or different from the task-relevant stimuli (including both stimulus and response incongruency), response times exhibited rhythmic fluctuations in the theta band (4~7.5 Hz). In contrast, when task-irrelevant stimuli were neutral, the processing was characterized by oscillations in the alpha band (9.4~10 Hz). Furthermore, we found that the magnitude of the cross-modal response conflict fluctuated rhythmically at a theta frequency (3.8 Hz) in the auditory task, whereas the magnitude of the cross-modal stimulus conflict fluctuated rhythmically at a theta frequency (5.6 Hz) in the visual task.

In summary, the present study demonstrates that cognitive control processes exhibit theta oscillations at the behavioral level, which directly modulate the magnitude of cross-modal stimulus conflict and response conflict. These findings elucidate the relationship between theta oscillations and conflict magnitude, and extend the rhythmic theory of attention to the domain of cognitive control in conflict processing.

Key words: cross-modal, stimulus conflict, response conflict, behavioral oscillation, theta

中图分类号:

B842

许红慧, 徐怡冉, 杨国春, 南威治, 刘勋. (2026). 行为振荡的Theta节律存在于跨通道刺激冲突与反应冲突加工中. 心理学报, 58(3), 467-479.

XU Honghui, XU Yiran, YANG Guochun, NAN Weizhi, LIU Xun. (2026). Behavioral theta oscillations in cross-modal stimulus conflict and response conflict processing. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 58(3), 467-479.

图/表 6

图1 实验1与实验2的实验设计和流程图注：图A、B分别为听觉任务和视觉任务的实验设计图, 图C为实验流程图。负值代表任务无关刺激先呈现, 正值代表任务相关刺激先呈现。SOA: Stimulus Onset Asynchrony。

图2 实验1 (A)与实验2 (B)合并SOA后的RT结果

图3 实验1中各个试次类型的RT随SOA的变化及频谱分析结果注：实验1(听觉任务)各个试次类型随SOA变化的曲线图(A-B)：原始RT值(A), 标准化和去趋势后的RT值(B)。各个试次类型的频谱分析结果(C-D)：总体被试数据分析方法(C), 虚线代表显著的临界点(ps < 0.05, FDR corrected); 单试次线性建模方法(D)。SOA负值代表视觉先呈现, SOA正值代表听觉刺激先呈现。彩图见电子版, 下同。

图4 实验1与实验2的刺激冲突与反应冲突的标准化和去趋势后的RT及频谱分析结果注：实验1：听觉任务(A-B), 实验2：视觉任务(C-D)。虚线代表显著的临界点(ps < 0.05, FDR corrected)。

图5 实验2中各个试次类型的RT随SOA的变化及频谱分析结果注：实验2(视觉任务)中各个试次类型随SOA变化的曲线(A-B)：原始RT值(A), 标准化和去趋势后的RT值(B)。各个试次类型的频谱分析结果(C-D)：总体被试数据分析方法(C), 虚线代表显著的临界点(ps < 0.05, FDR corrected); 单试次线性建模方法(D)。SOA负值代表听觉先呈现, SOA正值代表视觉刺激先呈现。

附图A1 实验1 (听觉任务)和实验2 (视觉任务)中跨通道刺激冲突幅度与跨通道反应冲突幅度的比较

参考文献 47

[1]	Appelbaum L. G., Boehler C. N., Davis L. A., Won R. J., & Woldorff M. G. (2014). The dynamics of proactive and reactive cognitive control processes in the human Brain. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 26(5), 1021-1038. doi: 10.1162/jocn_a_00542 URL
[2]	Augustinova M., Silvert L., Spatola N., & Ferrand L. (2018). Further investigation of distinct components of Stroop interference and of their reduction by short response- stimulus intervals. Acta Psychologica, 189, 54-62. doi: S0001-6918(17)30160-9 pmid: 28407872
[3]	Burca M., Beaucousin V., Chausse P., Ferrand L., Parris B. A., & Augustinova M. (2021). Is there semantic conflict in the Stroop task? Experimental Psychology, 68(5), 274-283.
[4]	Chen Q., & Zhou X. L. (2013). Vision dominates at the preresponse level and audition dominates at the response level in cross-modal interaction: Behavioral and neural evidence. The Journal of Neuroscience, 33(17), 7109-7121. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1985-12.2013 URL
[5]	Cohen M. X., & Cavanagh J. F. (2011). Single-trial regression elucidates the role of prefrontal theta oscillations in response conflict. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 30. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00030 pmid: 21713190
[6]	Cohen M. X., & Donner T. H. (2013). Midfrontal conflict- related theta-band power reflects neural oscillations that predict behavior. Journal of Neurophysiology, 110(12), 2752-2763. doi: 10.1152/jn.00479.2013 URL
[7]	De Cheveigné A., & Arzounian D. (2018). Robust detrending, rereferencing, outlier detection, and inpainting for multichannel data. NeuroImage, 172, 903-912. doi: S1053-8119(18)30035-1 pmid: 29448077
[8]	De Houwer J. (2003). On the role of stimulus-response and stimulus-stimulus compatibility in the Stroop effect. Memory & Cognition, 31(3), 353-359. doi: 10.3758/BF03194393 URL
[9]	Donohue S. E., Appelbaum L. G., Park C. J., Roberts K. C., & Woldorff M. G. (2013). Cross-modal stimulus conflict: The behavioral effects of stimulus input timing in a visual-auditory Stroop task. PloS One, 8(4), e62802.
[10]	Dugué L., & VanRullen R. (2017). Transcranial magnetic stimulation reveals intrinsic perceptual and attentional rhythms. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 11, 154. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2017.00154 pmid: 28396622
[11]	Efron B., & Gong G. (1983). A leisurely look at the bootstrap, the jackknife, and cross-validation. The American Statistician, 37(1), 36-48.
[12]	Egner T. (2008). Multiple conflict-driven control mechanisms in the human brain. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12(10), 374-380. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2008.07.001 pmid: 18760657
[13]	Fiebelkorn I. C., & Kastner S. (2019). A rhythmic theory of attention. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 23(2), 87-101. doi: S1364-6613(18)30281-X pmid: 30591373
[14]	Fiebelkorn I. C., Saalmann Y. B., & Kastner S. (2013). Rhythmic sampling within and between objects despite sustained attention at a cued location. Current Biology, 23(24), 2553-2558. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2013.10.063 pmid: 24316204
[15]	Haciahmet C. C., Frings C., Beste C., Münchau A., & Pastötter B. (2023). Posterior delta/theta EEG activity as an early signal of Stroop conflict detection. Psychophysiology, 60(3), e14195.
[16]	Haciahmet C. C., Frings C., & Pastötter B. (2021). Target amplification and distractor inhibition: Theta oscillatory dynamics of selective attention in a flanker task. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 21(2), 355-371.
[17]	Helfrich R. F., Fiebelkorn I. C., Szczepanski S. M., Lin J. J., Parvizi J., Knight R. T., & Kastner S. (2018). Neural mechanisms of sustained attention are rhythmic. Neuron, 99(4), 854-865. doi: S0896-6273(18)30630-5 pmid: 30138591
[18]	Ho H. T., Burr D. C., Alais D., & Morrone M. C. (2019). Auditory perceptual history is propagated through alpha oscillations. Current Biology, 29(24), 4208-4217. doi: S0960-9822(19)31381-8 pmid: 31761705
[19]	Hommel B. (2019). Theory of Event Coding (TEC) V2. 0: Representing and controlling perception and action. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 81(7), 2139-2154. doi: 10.3758/s13414-019-01779-4
[20]	Huang Y., Chen L., & Luo H. (2015). Behavioral oscillation in priming: Competing perceptual predictions conveyed in alternating theta-band rhythms. Journal of Neuroscience, 35(6), 2830-2837. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4294-14.2015 pmid: 25673869
[21]	Jia J. R., Fan Y., & Luo H. (2022). Alpha-band phase modulates bottom-up feature processing. Cerebral Cortex, 32(6), 1260-1268. doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhab291 URL
[22]	Jia J. R., Liu L., Fang F., & Luo H. (2017). Sequential sampling of visual objects during sustained attention. PloS Biology, 15(6), e2001903.
[23]	Jiang J., Zhang Q. L., & Van Gaal S. (2015). EEG neural oscillatory dynamics reveal semantic and response conflict at difference levels of conflict awareness. Scientific Reports, 5(1), 12008.
[24]	Kienitz R., Schmid M. C., & Dugué L. (2022). Rhythmic sampling revisited: Experimental paradigms and neural mechanisms. European Journal of Neuroscience, 55(11- 12), 3010-3024. doi: 10.1111/ejn.v55.11-12 URL
[25]	Landau A. N., & Fries P. (2012). Attention samples stimuli rhythmically. Current Biology, 22(11), 1000-1004. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2012.03.054 pmid: 22633805
[26]	Liu L., & Luo H. (2019). Behavioral oscillation in global/ local processing: Global alpha oscillations mediate global precedence effect. Journal of Vision, 19(5), 12.
[27]	Michel R., Dugué L., & Busch N. A. (2022). Distinct contributions of alpha and theta rhythms to perceptual and attentional sampling. European Journal of Neuroscience, 55(11-12), 3025-3039. doi: 10.1111/ejn.v55.11-12 URL
[28]	Miller E. K., & Cohen J. D. (2001). An integrative theory of prefrontal cortex function. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 24(1), 167-202. doi: 10.1146/neuro.2001.24.issue-1 URL
[29]	Mo C., Lu J. S., Wu B. C., Jia J. R., Luo H., & Fang F. (2019). Competing rhythmic neural representations of orientations during concurrent attention to multiple orientation features. Nature Communications, 10(1), 5264.
[30]	Nieuwenhuis S., & Yeung N. (2005). Neural mechanisms of attention and control: Losing our inhibitions? Nature Neuroscience, 8(12), 1631-1633. pmid: 16306886
[31]	Nigbur R., Cohen M. X., Ridderinkhof K. R., & Stürmer B. (2012). Theta dynamics reveal domain-specific control over stimulus and response conflict. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 24(5), 1264-1274. doi: 10.1162/jocn_a_00128 pmid: 21861681
[32]	Nigbur R., Ivanova G., & Stürmer B. (2011). Theta power as a marker for cognitive interference. Clinical Neurophysiology, 122(11), 2185-2194. doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2011.03.030 pmid: 21550845
[33]	Plöchl M., Fiebelkorn I., Kastner S., & Obleser J. (2022). Attentional sampling of visual and auditory objects is captured by theta‐modulated neural activity. European Journal of Neuroscience, 55(11-12), 3067-3082. doi: 10.1111/ejn.v55.11-12 URL
[34]	Pomper U., & Ansorge U. (2021). Theta-rhythmic oscillation of working memory performance. Psychological Science, 32(11), 1801-1810. doi: 10.1177/09567976211013045 URL
[35]	Re D., Inbar M., Richter C. G., & Landau A. N. (2019). Feature-based attention samples stimuli rhythmically. Current Biology, 29(4), 693-699. doi: S0960-9822(19)30012-0 pmid: 30744973
[36]	Senoussi M., Moreland J. C., Busch N. A., & Dugué L. (2019). Attention explores space periodically at the theta frequency. Journal of Vision, 19(5), 22.
[37]	Senoussi M., Verbeke P., Desender K., De Loof E., Talsma D., & Verguts T. (2022). Theta oscillations shift towards optimal frequency for cognitive control. Nature Human Behaviour, 6(7), 1000-1013. doi: 10.1038/s41562-022-01335-5 pmid: 35449299
[38]	Song K., Meng M., Chen L., Zhou K., & Luo H. (2014). Behavioral oscillations in attention: Rhythmic α pulses mediated through θ band. Journal of Neuroscience, 34(14), 4837-4844. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4856-13.2014 pmid: 24695703
[39]	Stroop J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18(6), 643-662. doi: 10.1037/h0054651 URL
[40]	Tomassini A., Ambrogioni L., Medendorp W. P., & Maris E. (2017). Theta oscillations locked to intended actions rhythmically modulate perception. Elife, 6, e25618.
[41]	van Veen V., & Carter C. S. (2005). Separating semantic conflict and response conflict in the Stroop task: A functional MRI study. NeuroImage, 27(3), 497-504. pmid: 15964208
[42]	Wang C., Li H., Jia L., Li F., & Wang J. (2020). Theta band behavioral fluctuations synchronized interpersonally during cooperation. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 27(3), 563-570. doi: 10.3758/s13423-020-01711-0
[43]	Xu H. H., Yang G. C., Göschl F., Nolte G., Ren Q. Y., Li Z. H.,... Liu X. (2024). Distinct and common mechanisms of cross-model semantic conflict and response conflict in an auditory relevant task. Cerebral Cortex, 34(3), bhae105.
[44]	Xu H. H., Yang G. C., Wu H. Y., Xiao J., Li Q., & Liu X. (2024). Distinct mechanisms underlying cross-modal semantic conflict and response conflict processing. Cerebral Cortex, 34(2), bhad539.
[45]	Yang Y., Qi Z. Y., Zhang K. H., & Luo W. B. (2019). Behavioral oscillations and their performance in attention and perception. Chinese Science Bulletin, 64(5), 546-554.
	[杨阳, 齐正阳, 张珂烨, 罗文波. (2019). 行为振荡:揭示心理过程动态变化的新现象. 科学通报, 64(5), 546-554.]
[46]	Zhang H., & Kornblum S. (1998). The effects of stimulus- response mapping and irrelevant stimulus-response and stimulus-stimulus overlap in four-choice Stroop tasks with single-carrier stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24(1), 3-19. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.24.1.3 URL
[47]	Zhang X. D., Zhang L. J., Ding Y. L., & Qu Z. (2021). Behavioral oscillations in attentional processing. Advances in Psychological Science, 29(3), 460-471. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2021.00460
	[章小丹, 张沥今, 丁玉珑, 曲折. (2021). 注意过程中的行为振荡现象. 心理科学进展, 29(3), 460-471.] doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2021.00460

行为振荡的Theta节律存在于跨通道刺激冲突与反应冲突加工中

Behavioral theta oscillations in cross-modal stimulus conflict and response conflict processing

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

评审附件

可视化

English Version

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 6

参考文献 47

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	唐溢, 赵亚军, 曾清樟, 张智君, 吴圣楠. 单通道和多通道下的统计学习跨通道迁移[J]. 心理学报, 2026, 58(4): 590-602.
[2]	王爱君, 黄杰, 赵丹娜, 李欣, 张明. 刺激相似性对跨通道冲突中感觉主导效应的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2026, 58(4): 571-589.
[3]	祖光耀, 李舒淇, 张天阳, 王爱君, 张明. 返回抑制对视听跨通道对应的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2023, 55(8): 1220-1233.
[4]	孙楚, 耿海燕. 自我与他人视角的动态信息加工：一项行为振荡研究[J]. 心理学报, 2023, 55(2): 224-236.
[5]	彭宇彬, 宛小昂. 视觉搜索中风味引发对关联颜色的注意偏向[J]. 心理学报, 2022, 54(7): 736-747.
[6]	贾世伟, 齐丛丛, 陈乐乐, 任衍具. 工作记忆负荷对反馈加工过程的影响: 来自脑电研究的证据[J]. 心理学报, 2022, 54(3): 248-258.
[7]	杨集梅, 柴洁余, 邱天龙, 全小山, 郑茂平. 共情与中国民族音乐情绪识别的关系：来自ERP的证据[J]. 心理学报, 2022, 54(10): 1181-1192.
[8]	张明, 桑汉斌, 鲁柯, 王爱君. 试次历史对跨通道非空间返回抑制的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2021, 53(7): 681-693.
[9]	李垚锦, 张微, 扶蓓, 周兵平. 成人注意缺陷多动障碍在内外源冲突时的表现：眼动的证据[J]. 心理学报, 2020, 52(6): 777-785.
[10]	周爱保;李世峰;史战;刘沛汝;夏瑞雪;徐科朋;朱婧;任德云. 寻找自我：自我相关物主代词的编码与 theta节律的活动[J]. 心理学报, 2013, 45(7): 790-796.
[11]	辛,勇,李,红,袁加锦. 负性情绪干扰行为抑制控制: 一项事件相关电位研究[J]. 心理学报, 2010, 42(03): 334-341.
[12]	Soledad Ballesteros and Julia Mayas. 保留的跨通道启动与老化：对于近期观点的总结[J]. 心理学报, 2009, 41(11): 1063-1074.
[13]	王勇慧，周晓林，王玉凤,张亚旭. 两种亚型ADHD儿童在停止信号任务中的反应抑制[J]. 心理学报, 2005, 37(02): 178-188.
[14]	周晓林,曲延轩,舒华,Gareth Gaskell,William Marslen-Wilson. 汉语听觉词汇加工中声调信息对语义激活的制约作用[J]. 心理学报, 2004, 36(04): 379-392.
[15]	杨丽霞,傅小兰. 视-听跨通道汉语词汇信息加工中的抑制机制[J]. 心理学报, 2002, 34(01): 11-16.