Centre for Cognition and its Disorders, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW 2109, Australia.
Exp Brain Res. 2012 Feb;216(3):433-43. doi: 10.1007/s00221-011-2944-0. Epub 2011 Nov 19.
The purpose of the present study was to establish whether the validity effect produced by masked eye gaze cues should be attributed to strictly reflexive mechanisms or to volitional top-down mechanisms. While we find that masked eye gaze cues are effective in producing a validity effect in a central cueing paradigm, we also find that the efficacy of masked gaze cues is sharply constrained by the experimental context. Specifically, masked gaze cues only produced a validity effect when they appeared in the context of unmasked and predictive gaze cues. Unmasked gaze cues, in contrast, produced reliable validity effects across a range of experimental contexts, including Experiment 4 where 80% of the cues were invalid (counter-predictive). Taken together, these results suggest that the effective processing of masked gaze cues requires volitional control, whereas the processing of unmasked (clearly visible) gaze cues appears to benefit from both reflexive and top-down mechanisms.
本研究的目的是确定掩蔽眼动线索产生的有效性效应是归因于严格的反射机制还是意志自上而下的机制。虽然我们发现掩蔽眼动线索在中央线索范式中有效地产生了有效性效应,但我们也发现掩蔽眼动线索的功效受到实验背景的严格限制。具体来说,只有当掩蔽的眼动线索出现在未掩蔽和预测性眼动线索的情况下时,它们才会产生有效性效应。相比之下,未掩蔽的眼动线索在各种实验背景下都产生了可靠的有效性效应,包括实验 4 中 80%的线索是无效的(反预测)。综上所述,这些结果表明,掩蔽眼动线索的有效处理需要意志控制,而未掩蔽(清晰可见)眼动线索的处理似乎既受益于反射机制,也受益于自上而下的机制。