• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

当刺激驱动的控制设置相互竞争时:论类别作为控制线索的主导地位。

When stimulus-driven control settings compete: On the dominance of categories as cues for control.

作者信息

Bugg Julie M, Dey Abhishek

机构信息

Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Washington University in St. Louis.

出版信息

J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2018 Dec;44(12):1905-1932. doi: 10.1037/xhp0000580. Epub 2018 Sep 13.

DOI:10.1037/xhp0000580
PMID:30211592
Abstract

Stimulus-driven or reactive control refers to the modulation of attention poststimulus onset via retrieval of learned control settings associated with task stimuli. The present study asked which stimulus-driven control setting "wins" the competition when more than 1 is available to guide attention. Utilizing an item-specific proportion congruence manipulation in a picture-word Stroop task, 7 experiments examined competition between item-level and category-level control settings. In Experiment 1, category-level control dominated as evidenced by transfer of control to unique 50% congruent items (exemplars) from biased (33% or 67% congruent) animal categories. In Experiment 2, the dominance persisted-transfer was observed even for inconsistent transfer items (e.g., 83% congruent bird from a 33% congruent bird category). Recategorization of the exemplars prior to the Stroop task (Experiment 3a) successfully shifted the dominance to item-level control as did changing the Stroop task goal (Experiment 4a); however, exposure to the exemplars (Experiment 3b) and individuation training prior to the Stroop task did not (Experiments 3c and 4b). These novel findings suggest category-level control dominates in guiding attention poststimulus onset, but this dominance is dependent on contextual features (i.e., mutable). We propose a salience account of dominance and discuss implications for item-based computational models. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).

摘要

刺激驱动或反应性控制是指在刺激开始后,通过检索与任务刺激相关的习得控制设置来调节注意力。本研究探讨了当有多种刺激驱动控制设置可用于引导注意力时,哪种设置会“赢得”竞争。在一项图片-单词Stroop任务中,通过特定项目的比例一致性操作,7个实验检验了项目级和类别级控制设置之间的竞争。在实验1中,类别级控制占主导地位,这表现为控制从有偏差的(33%或67%一致)动物类别转移到独特的50%一致项目(范例)上。在实验2中,这种主导地位持续存在——即使是不一致的转移项目(例如,来自33%一致鸟类类别的83%一致鸟类)也观察到了转移。在Stroop任务之前对范例进行重新分类(实验3a),以及改变Stroop任务目标(实验4a),都成功地将主导地位转移到了项目级控制;然而,在Stroop任务之前接触范例(实验3b)以及个体化训练(实验3c和4b)则没有。这些新发现表明,类别级控制在刺激开始后引导注意力方面占主导地位,但这种主导地位取决于情境特征(即可变的)。我们提出了一种关于主导地位的显著性解释,并讨论了对基于项目的计算模型的影响。(PsycINFO数据库记录(c)2018美国心理学会,保留所有权利)

相似文献

1
When stimulus-driven control settings compete: On the dominance of categories as cues for control.当刺激驱动的控制设置相互竞争时:论类别作为控制线索的主导地位。
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2018 Dec;44(12):1905-1932. doi: 10.1037/xhp0000580. Epub 2018 Sep 13.
2
Between-task transfer of item-specific control is replicable and extends to novel conditions.任务间项目特异性控制的迁移是可复制的,并扩展到新的条件。
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2024 Jun;50(6):535-553. doi: 10.1037/xhp0001200. Epub 2024 Apr 4.
3
Converging evidence for control of color-word Stroop interference at the item level.控制颜色-词 Stroop 干扰的项目水平的汇聚证据。
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2013 Apr;39(2):433-49. doi: 10.1037/a0029145. Epub 2012 Jul 30.
4
Adaptation to conflict frequency without contingency and temporal learning: Evidence from the picture-word interference task.无需应急和时间学习即可适应冲突频率:来自图片-词汇干扰任务的证据。
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2019 Aug;45(8):995-1014. doi: 10.1037/xhp0000656. Epub 2019 May 30.
5
Working memory load dissociates contingency learning and item-specific proportion-congruent effects.工作记忆负荷分离了条件学习和项目特定比例一致效应。
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2020 Nov;46(11):2007-2033. doi: 10.1037/xlm0000934. Epub 2020 Jul 13.
6
Item-specific control of attention in the Stroop task: Contingency learning is not the whole story in the item-specific proportion-congruent effect.斯特鲁普任务中对注意的项目特异性控制:在项目特异性比例一致效应中,条件学习并不是全部原因。
Mem Cognit. 2020 Apr;48(3):426-435. doi: 10.3758/s13421-019-00980-y.
7
Context-specific proportion congruent effects: Compound-cue contingency learning in disguise.情境特定的比例一致性效应:伪装下的复合线索偶然性学习
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2019 May;72(5):1119-1130. doi: 10.1177/1747021818787155. Epub 2018 Jul 17.
8
What can be learned in a context-specific proportion congruence paradigm? Implications for reproducibility.在特定语境比例一致性范式中可以学到什么?对可重复性的启示。
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2020 Sep;46(9):1029-1050. doi: 10.1037/xhp0000801. Epub 2020 Jun 25.
9
List-wide control is not entirely elusive: evidence from picture-word Stroop.通盘控制并非完全难以捉摸:来自图画词汇斯特鲁普的证据。
Psychon Bull Rev. 2011 Oct;18(5):930-6. doi: 10.3758/s13423-011-0112-y.
10
Effects of task repetition but no transfer of inhibitory control training in healthy adults.任务重复对健康成年人抑制控制训练的影响,但无训练迁移效果。
Acta Psychol (Amst). 2018 Jun;187:37-53. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2018.04.016. Epub 2018 May 14.

引用本文的文献

1
Proactive control declines while reactive control is preserved across the adult lifespan.在整个成年期,主动控制能力下降,而反应性控制能力则得以保留。
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2025 Aug 25. doi: 10.1037/xge0001824.
2
Does an external distractor interfere with the triggering of item-specific control?外部干扰器是否会干扰特定项目控制的触发?
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2025 Jun;51(6):808-825. doi: 10.1037/xhp0001323. Epub 2025 Mar 31.
3
A spatial version of the Stroop task for examining proactive and reactive control independently from non-conflict processes.
一种空间版 Stroop 任务,用于独立于非冲突过程考察前摄和反应控制。
Atten Percept Psychophys. 2024 May;86(4):1259-1286. doi: 10.3758/s13414-024-02892-9. Epub 2024 Apr 30.
4
One-shot stimulus-control associations generalize over different stimulus viewpoints and exemplars.一次性刺激-控制关联可在不同的刺激观点和示例中泛化。
Mem Cognit. 2025 Feb;53(2):439-452. doi: 10.3758/s13421-024-01573-0. Epub 2024 Apr 26.
5
Humans do not avoid reactively implementing cognitive control.人类不会主动避免执行认知控制。
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2024 Jun;50(6):587-604. doi: 10.1037/xhp0001207. Epub 2024 Apr 11.
6
Cognitive control controls the effect of irrelevant stimulus-response learning.认知控制控制了无关刺激-反应学习的效果。
Atten Percept Psychophys. 2024 Apr;86(3):866-882. doi: 10.3758/s13414-024-02860-3. Epub 2024 Feb 27.
7
On the psychometric evaluation of cognitive control tasks: An Investigation with the Dual Mechanisms of Cognitive Control (DMCC) battery.认知控制任务的心理计量学评估:采用双机制认知控制(DMCC)电池的研究。
Behav Res Methods. 2024 Mar;56(3):1604-1639. doi: 10.3758/s13428-023-02111-7. Epub 2023 Apr 11.
8
Dissociating selectivity adjustments from temporal learning-introducing the context-dependent proportion congruency effect.从时间学习中分离选择性调整——引入上下文相关比例一致性效应。
PLoS One. 2022 Dec 13;17(12):e0276611. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0276611. eCollection 2022.
9
The item-specific proportion congruency effect transfers to non-category members based on broad visual similarity.基于广泛的视觉相似性,特定项目比例一致性效应会转移到非类别成员身上。
Psychon Bull Rev. 2022 Oct;29(5):1821-1830. doi: 10.3758/s13423-022-02104-1. Epub 2022 Apr 25.
10
Distinct but correlated latent factors support the regulation of learned conflict-control and task-switching.不同但相关的潜在因素支持学习冲突控制和任务转换的调节。
Cogn Psychol. 2022 Jun;135:101474. doi: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2022.101474. Epub 2022 Apr 8.