Mulligan Neil W, Peterson Daniel
Department of Psychology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2008 May;34(3):662-79. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.34.3.662.
Prior research on implicit memory appeared to support 3 generalizations: Conceptual tests are affected by divided attention, perceptual tasks are affected by certain divided-attention manipulations, and all types of priming are affected by selective attention. These generalizations are challenged in experiments using the implicit tests of category verification and lexical decision. First, both tasks were unaffected by divided-attention tasks known to impact other priming tasks. Second, both tasks were unaffected by a manipulation of selective attention in which colored words were either named or their colors identified. Thus, category verification, unlike other conceptual tasks, appears unaffected by divided attention, and some selective-attention tasks, and lexical decision, unlike other perceptual tasks, appears unaffected by a difficult divided-attention task and some selective-attention tasks. Finally, both tasks were affected by a selective-attention task in which attention was manipulated across objects (rather than within objects), indicating some susceptibility to selective attention. The results contradict an analysis on the basis of the conceptual-perceptual distinction and other more specific hypotheses but are consistent with the distinction between production and identification priming.
概念测试会受到分散注意力的影响，知觉任务会受到某些分散注意力操作的影响，并且所有类型的启动效应都会受到选择性注意的影响。在使用类别验证和词汇判断的内隐测试的实验中，这些普遍观点受到了挑战。首先，这两项任务都不受已知会影响其他启动任务的分散注意力任务的影响。其次，这两项任务都不受选择性注意操作的影响，在该操作中，彩色单词要么被命名，要么其颜色被识别。因此，与其他概念任务不同，类别验证似乎不受分散注意力的影响，并且一些选择性注意任务以及词汇判断，与其他知觉任务不同，似乎不受困难的分散注意力任务和一些选择性注意任务的影响。最后，这两项任务都受到一种选择性注意任务的影响，在该任务中，注意力是在不同对象之间（而非在对象内部）进行操控的，这表明它们对选择性注意有一定的敏感性。这些结果与基于概念 - 知觉区分和其他更具体假设的分析相矛盾，但与产生性启动和识别性启动之间的区分是一致的。
