Zimmer Hubert D, Speiser Harry R, Seidler Beate
Department of Psychology, Saarland University, P.O. Box 151150, Saarbrücken D-66041, Germany.
Acta Psychol (Amst). 2003 Sep;114(1):41-65. doi: 10.1016/s0001-6918(03)00049-0.
Spatial short-term memory for objects' locations was investigated in a spatial relocation task. During maintenance, dynamic visual noise or spatial tapping were administered as visual or spatial secondary tasks, respectively. Because memory for location should tap the visual component of working memory, a visual but not a spatial secondary task should impair location memory. In fact, neither of the tasks impaired memory (Experiment 1), although the expected dissociation between visual and spatial components was clearly confirmed for a spatio-temporal main task (Corsi test) (Experiment 2). We then contrasted location memory for pictures of objects and of nonsense figures under visual interference. Real objects were relocated much better than nonsense figures, and visual noise was again ineffective (Experiment 3). When spatial tapping was combined with the same material (Experiment 3a), again no influence on memory for locations of objects was observed and only a small influence on remembering nonsense figures. We suggest that the Corsi and the relocation VSWM-tasks use different memory mechanisms. The configuration of objects is reconstructed from perceptual records in an episodic buffer, provided by the same structures that enable visual memory after longer intervals. Rehearsal is not necessary for the persistence of these traces. In contrast, in the Corsi task remembering, a temporal sequence across homogeneous locations needs spatio-temporal marking and therefore active rehearsal of the locations by shifting spatial attention. A spatially demanding secondary task during retention interrupts this rehearsal.
在一项空间重新定位任务中，对物体位置的空间短期记忆进行了研究。在维持阶段，分别施加动态视觉噪声或空间敲击作为视觉或空间次要任务。由于位置记忆应利用工作记忆的视觉成分，所以视觉而非空间次要任务应损害位置记忆。事实上，这两项任务均未损害记忆（实验1），尽管对于一项时空主要任务（科西测试），视觉和空间成分之间预期的分离得到了明确证实（实验2）。然后，我们在视觉干扰下对比了物体图片和无意义图形的位置记忆。真实物体的重新定位比无意义图形要好得多，并且视觉噪声再次无效（实验3）。当空间敲击与相同材料结合时（实验3a），同样未观察到对物体位置记忆的影响，对无意义图形记忆的影响也很小。我们认为，科西任务和重新定位视觉空间工作记忆任务使用不同的记忆机制。物体的构型是从情节缓冲器中的感知记录重建而来的，情节缓冲器由那些在较长时间间隔后仍能实现视觉记忆的相同结构提供。这些痕迹的持续存在不需要复述。相比之下，在科西任务记忆中，跨越同质位置的时间序列需要时空标记，因此需要通过转移空间注意力对位置进行主动复述。在保持期间一项对空间要求较高的次要任务会中断这种复述。
