Department of Mathematics, Computer Science Section, Wayne State University, 48202, Detroit, Michigan.
Mem Cognit. 1977 Jul;5(4):449-52. doi: 10.3758/BF03197384.
Past studies have shown that in certain tasks, subjects are not able to selectively attend to specific areas of a visual display even if instructed to do so. Yet, a more recent study (Graves, 1976) has used the concept of selective attention to explain the difference between the number of items processed in forced choice detection tasks and the number processed in full report tasks. Graves proposed that only identification processing is necessary in the detection task, while both identification and position processing are required in the full report task. A problem with Graves' task is that it requires memory searching after stimulus presentation, probably reducing the predicted number of items processed. The experiment reported here utilized partially filled arrays and required responses based upon only positional processing, or only identification processing, or both types of processing. In direct contradiction to Graves' conclusions, the results showed that although subjects could inhibit identification processing while engaged in positional processing, the reverse was not true. In addition, positional processing was shown to be faster than identification processing.
过去的研究表明,在某些任务中,即使被指示这样做,受试者也无法有选择地关注视觉显示的特定区域。然而,最近的一项研究(Graves,1976)使用选择性注意的概念来解释在强制选择检测任务中处理的项目数量与在完整报告任务中处理的项目数量之间的差异。Graves 提出,在检测任务中只需要进行识别处理,而在完整报告任务中则需要进行识别和位置处理。Graves 任务的一个问题是,它需要在刺激呈现后进行记忆搜索,这可能会减少预测的处理项目数量。这里报告的实验利用部分填充的数组,并要求根据仅位置处理、仅识别处理或两种类型的处理进行响应。与 Graves 的结论直接矛盾的是,结果表明,尽管受试者在进行位置处理时可以抑制识别处理,但反之则不然。此外,位置处理比识别处理更快。