Quinn J G, McConnell Jean
School of Psychology, University of St Andrews, Scotland, UK.
Memory. 2006 Feb;14(2):241-52. doi: 10.1080/09658210500210019.
Three experiments are described that use dynamic visual noise (DVN) to interfere with words processed under visual and verbal processing instructions. In Experiment 1 DVN is presented to coincide with the encoding of the words or to coincide with the interval between encoding and recall. The results show that while DVN is a robust disruptor when it is applied during encoding to words processed under visual instruction, it has no effect during encoding when the words are processed under rote instruction. Moreover, DVN has no effect when it is applied during the retention interval, no matter what means are employed to encode the words. Experiment 2 extends these findings by again showing no effect of DVN during the retention interval, yet showing robust interference effects for visually processed words during recall. Finally, Experiment 3 demonstrates that the results of Experiments 1 and 2 cannot be explained by a difference in the time duration associated with application of DVN during the retention interval compared to during encoding and recall. Moreover, the differing decay functions for visually and verbally processed words during the intervals used in Experiment 3 suggest that any failure to cause interference is not because the two processing instructions resulted in words being retained in the same medium. The functions are consistent with word storage mechanisms reflecting appropriately verbal and visual properties. The results are discussed in terms of current models of visual working memory. It is argued that a full interpretation of the results requires a buffer mechanism as an important component of any model of visual working memory.
本文描述了三个实验，这些实验使用动态视觉噪声（DVN）来干扰在视觉和言语加工指令下处理的单词。在实验1中，DVN在单词编码时呈现，或者在编码与回忆之间的间隔期呈现。结果表明，当DVN在编码期间应用于视觉指令下处理的单词时，它是一种强大的干扰因素，但当单词在死记硬背指令下处理时，它在编码期间没有效果。此外，无论采用何种方式对单词进行编码，DVN在保持间隔期应用时都没有效果。实验2扩展了这些发现，再次表明DVN在保持间隔期没有效果，但在回忆期间对视觉处理的单词显示出强大的干扰效应。最后，实验3表明，实验1和实验2的结果不能用与在保持间隔期应用DVN相比在编码和回忆期间应用DVN的持续时间差异来解释。此外，实验3中使用的间隔期内视觉和言语处理单词的不同衰减函数表明，未能产生干扰不是因为两种处理指令导致单词存储在相同的媒介中。这些函数与反映适当言语和视觉属性的单词存储机制一致。本文根据当前的视觉工作记忆模型对结果进行了讨论。有人认为，对结果的全面解释需要一个缓冲机制作为任何视觉工作记忆模型的重要组成部分。
