Suppr超能文献

因果关系和连续性填补了事件表征中的空白。

Causality and continuity close the gaps in event representations.

作者信息

Kominsky Jonathan F, Baker Lewis, Keil Frank C, Strickland Brent

机构信息

Department of Psychology, Rutgers University, 101 Warren St. Rm. 301, Newark, NJ, 07102, USA.

Pymetrics, Inc., New York, NY, USA.

出版信息

Mem Cognit. 2021 Apr;49(3):518-531. doi: 10.3758/s13421-020-01102-9. Epub 2020 Oct 6.

Abstract

Imagine you see a video of someone pulling back their leg to kick a soccer ball, and then a soccer ball soaring toward a goal. You would likely infer that these scenes are two parts of the same event, and this inference would likely cause you to remember having seen the moment the person kicked the soccer ball, even if that information was never actually presented (Strickland & Keil, 2011, Cognition, 121[3], 409-415). What cues trigger people to "fill in" causal events from incomplete information? Is it due to the experience they have had with soccer balls being kicked toward goals? Is it the visual similarity of the object in both halves of the video? Or is it the mere spatiotemporal continuity of the event? In three experiments, we tested these different potential mechanisms underlying the "filling-in" effect. Experiment 1 showed that filling in occurs equally in familiar and unfamiliar contexts, indicating that familiarity with specific event schemas is unnecessary to trigger false memory. Experiment 2 showed that the visible continuation of a launched object's trajectory is all that is required to trigger filling in, regardless of other occurrences in the second half of the scene. Finally, Experiment 3 found that, using naturalistic videos, this filling-in effect is more heavily affected if the object's trajectory is discontinuous in space/time compared with if the object undergoes a noticeable transformation. Together, these findings indicate that the spontaneous formation of causal event representations is driven by object representation systems that prioritize spatiotemporal information over other object features.

摘要

想象一下,你看到一段视频,视频中有人向后抬起腿准备踢足球,然后足球飞向球门。你很可能会推断这些场景是同一事件的两个部分,而这种推断可能会让你记得自己看到了那个人踢足球的瞬间,即使这个信息实际上从未出现过(斯特里克兰德和基尔,2011年,《认知》,第121卷第3期,第409 - 415页)。是什么线索促使人们从不完整的信息中“填补”因果事件呢?是因为他们有过足球被踢向球门的经历吗?是视频两部分中物体的视觉相似性吗?还是仅仅是事件的时空连续性呢?在三个实验中,我们测试了“填补”效应背后的这些不同潜在机制。实验1表明,在熟悉和不熟悉的情境中都会出现填补现象,这表明触发错误记忆并不需要熟悉特定的事件模式。实验2表明,被发射物体轨迹的可见延续是触发填补所需的全部条件,无论场景后半部分还发生了什么。最后,实验3发现,使用自然主义视频,如果物体的轨迹在空间/时间上不连续,与物体经历明显变化相比,这种填补效应受到的影响更大。这些发现共同表明,因果事件表征的自发形成是由优先考虑时空信息而非其他物体特征的物体表征系统驱动的。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/508d/8021615/fcf5433d20e9/nihms-1635566-f0001.jpg

相似文献

1
Causality and continuity close the gaps in event representations.因果关系和连续性填补了事件表征中的空白。
Mem Cognit. 2021 Apr;49(3):518-531. doi: 10.3758/s13421-020-01102-9. Epub 2020 Oct 6.
8
Effects of similarity on environmental context cueing.相似性对环境背景线索的影响。
Memory. 2014;22(5):493-508. doi: 10.1080/09658211.2013.800553. Epub 2013 May 31.

本文引用的文献

1
4
Eye-Tracking Causality.眼动追踪因果关系。
Psychol Sci. 2017 Dec;28(12):1731-1744. doi: 10.1177/0956797617713053. Epub 2017 Oct 17.
5
Categories and Constraints in Causal Perception.因果感知中的范畴与约束。
Psychol Sci. 2017 Nov;28(11):1649-1662. doi: 10.1177/0956797617719930. Epub 2017 Sep 28.
7
Change blindness and inattentional blindness.变化盲视和疏忽盲视。
Wiley Interdiscip Rev Cogn Sci. 2011 Sep;2(5):529-546. doi: 10.1002/wcs.130. Epub 2011 Mar 1.
9
The role of relational triggers in event perception.关系触发因素在事件感知中的作用。
Cognition. 2015 Mar;136:14-29. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2014.11.030. Epub 2014 Dec 6.

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