Siddle D A
University of Tasmania.
Psychophysiology. 1991 May;28(3):245-59. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.1991.tb02190.x.
This paper addresses the question of the most appropriate theoretical account of the phenomena of orienting and habituation. Several lines of evidence are reviewed. First, it is argued that the effects of stimulus omission require a comparator theory in which it is asserted that responses to iterated events result from a comparison between predicted and actual stimulus input. Second, the data from studies in which paired stimulus events are employed seem, at least at first sight, to be best explained in terms of a comparator theory in which a key role is ascribed to associative processes. Third, secondary task probe reaction time data indicate that events that elicit orienting also command processing resources, and that habituation involves changes in the manner in which events are processed. Finally, recent data on the effects of intermodality change indicate that electrodermal responses are larger on the change trial than on the first habituation training trial; these results seem problematical for noncomparator theories. However, other data on the context-specificity of habituation and on the effects of stimulus miscuing cast doubt on the usefulness of an associative analysis as a general account of habituation phenomena. Nevertheless, the weight of evidence seems to indicate that an adequate theory of human habituation must include a comparison process and must acknowledge that orienting and habituation involve a re-allocation of attentional resources.
本文探讨了对定向和习惯化现象最合适的理论解释问题。回顾了几条证据线索。首先，有人认为刺激缺失的效应需要一种比较器理论，该理论认为对重复事件的反应是由预测刺激输入与实际刺激输入之间的比较产生的。其次，至少乍一看，使用配对刺激事件的研究数据似乎最好用一种比较器理论来解释，在该理论中，联想过程被赋予了关键作用。第三，次要任务探测反应时数据表明，引发定向的事件也需要处理资源，并且习惯化涉及事件处理方式的变化。最后，关于跨模态变化效应的最新数据表明，与第一次习惯化训练试验相比，在变化试验中皮肤电反应更大；这些结果对于非比较器理论来说似乎是有问题的。然而，关于习惯化的情境特异性以及刺激错误提示效应的其他数据，对联想分析作为习惯化现象的一般解释的有用性提出了质疑。尽管如此，证据的分量似乎表明，一个充分的人类习惯化理论必须包括一个比较过程，并且必须承认定向和习惯化涉及注意力资源的重新分配。
