Barzykowski Krystian, Radel Rémi, Niedźwieńska Agnieszka, Kvavilashvili Lia
Applied Memory Research Laboratory, Institute of Psychology, Jagiellonian University, ul. Ingardena 6, 30-060, Kraków, Poland.
Université Côte d'Azur, Nice, France.
Psychol Res. 2019 Jun;83(4):666-683. doi: 10.1007/s00426-018-1120-6. Epub 2018 Nov 27.
In everyday life, involuntary thoughts about future plans and events occur as often as involuntary thoughts about the past. However, compared to involuntary autobiographical memories (IAMs), such episodic involuntary future thoughts (IFTs) have become a focus of study only recently. The aim of the present investigation was to examine why we are not constantly flooded by IFTs and IAMs given that they are often triggered by incidental cues while performing undemanding activities. One possibility is that activated thoughts are suppressed by the inhibitory control mechanism, and therefore depleting inhibitory control should enhance the frequency of both IFTs and IAMs. We report an experiment with a between-subjects design, in which participants in the depleted inhibition condition performed a 60-min high-conflict Stroop task before completing a laboratory vigilance task measuring the frequency of IFTs and IAMs. Participants in the intact inhibition condition performed a version of the Stroop task that did not deplete inhibitory control. To control for physical and mental fatigue resulting from performing the 60-min Stroop tasks in experimental conditions, participants in the control condition completed only the vigilance task. Contrary to predictions, the number of IFTs and IAMs reported during the vigilance task, using the probe-caught method, did not differ across conditions. However, manipulation checks showed that participants' inhibitory resources were reduced in the depleted inhibition condition, and participants were more tired in the experimental than in the control conditions. These initial findings suggest that neither inhibitory control nor physical and mental fatigue affect the frequency of IFTs and IAMs.
在日常生活中，关于未来计划和事件的非自主性思维与关于过去的非自主性思维出现的频率一样高。然而，与非自主性自传体记忆（IAMs）相比，这种情景性非自主性未来思维（IFTs）直到最近才成为研究的焦点。本研究的目的是探讨为什么我们不会一直被IFTs和IAMs所淹没，因为它们在进行简单活动时常常由偶然线索触发。一种可能性是，被激活的思维会被抑制控制机制所抑制，因此抑制控制资源的耗尽应该会增加IFTs和IAMs的出现频率。我们报告了一项采用被试间设计的实验，在该实验中，处于抑制资源耗尽条件下的参与者在完成一项测量IFTs和IAMs出现频率的实验室警觉任务之前，先进行了60分钟的高冲突斯特鲁普任务。处于完整抑制条件下的参与者进行了一个不会耗尽抑制控制资源的斯特鲁普任务版本。为了控制在实验条件下进行60分钟斯特鲁普任务所导致的身体和精神疲劳，处于控制条件下的参与者只完成了警觉任务。与预测相反，使用探测捕捉法在警觉任务期间报告的IFTs和IAMs的数量在不同条件下没有差异。然而，操纵性检查表明，在抑制资源耗尽条件下参与者的抑制资源减少了，并且与控制条件相比，实验条件下的参与者更疲劳。这些初步发现表明，抑制控制以及身体和精神疲劳都不会影响IFTs和IAMs的出现频率。
