Dreisbach Gesine, Goschke Thomas, Haider Hilde
Institute of Psychology I, Dresden University of Technology, Dresden, Germany.
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2006 Nov;32(6):1221-33. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.32.6.1221.
In 2 experiments, the authors compare stimulus-based versus task-rule-based task performance. Participants practiced 8 stimulus-response mappings either with or without knowledge about 2 underlying task sets. After practice, 2 transfer blocks with 8 new stimuli were presented. Results show that rule knowledge leads to significant switch and transfer costs, whereas without rule knowledge neither switch nor transfer costs occur. However, significant Task Type x Response Type interactions occurred in both conditions. In a second experiment including only the no rule condition, half of the stimulus-response mappings in the transfer blocks were incongruent to the underlying task rule. Slower response times for these incongruent stimuli as compared with congruent stimuli and the absence of switch costs suggest that participants acquired (presumably implicit) knowledge about 4 different stimulus-response categories.
在两项实验中,作者比较了基于刺激与基于任务规则的任务表现。参与者练习了8种刺激-反应映射,练习过程中他们了解或不了解两个潜在的任务集。练习之后,呈现了包含8种新刺激的两个转换阶段。结果显示,规则知识会导致显著的转换和迁移成本,而在没有规则知识的情况下,转换成本和迁移成本均不会出现。然而,在两种情况下均出现了显著的任务类型×反应类型交互作用。在仅包含无规则条件的第二项实验中,转换阶段的一半刺激-反应映射与潜在任务规则不一致。与一致刺激相比,这些不一致刺激的反应时间更慢,且不存在转换成本,这表明参与者获得了(可能是隐性的)关于4种不同刺激-反应类别的知识。