Suppr超能文献

防止捕获:更高的显著性是否会导致更大的抑制?

On preventing capture: Does greater salience cause greater suppression?

机构信息

School of Psychological Science, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, 97331-5303, USA.

Department of Psychology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, 87131-0001, USA.

出版信息

Atten Percept Psychophys. 2023 Nov;85(8):2553-2566. doi: 10.3758/s13414-023-02694-5. Epub 2023 Mar 28.

Abstract

It has been proposed that salient objects have high potential to disrupt target performance, and so people learn to proactively suppress them, thereby preventing these salient distractors from capturing attention in the future. Consistent with this hypothesis, Gaspar et al. (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(13), 3693-3698, 2016) reported that the P (believed to index suppression) was larger for high-salient color distractors than for low-salient color distractors. The present study looked for converging evidence that salience triggers suppression using established behavior measures of suppression. Following Gaspar et al., our participants searched for a yellow target circle among nine background circles, which sometimes included one circle with a unique color. The distractor was either high or low in salience with respect to the background circles. The question was whether the high-salient color would be proactively suppressed more strongly than the low-salient color. This was assessed using the capture-probe paradigm. On 33% of trials, probe letters appeared inside colored circles and participants were to report those letters. If high-salient colors are more strongly suppressed, then probe recall accuracy should be lower at locations with the high-salient color than those with the low-salient color. Experiment 1 found no such effect. A similar finding was observed in Experiment 2 after addressing possible floor effects. These findings suggest that proactive suppression is not caused by salience. We propose that the P reflects not only proactive suppression but also reactive suppression.

摘要

有人提出,显著物体有可能破坏目标表现,因此人们学会主动抑制它们,从而防止这些显著干扰物在未来吸引注意力。与这一假设一致,Gaspar 等人(《美国国家科学院院刊》,113(13),3693-3698,2016)报告称,高显著度颜色干扰物的 P(被认为是抑制的指标)高于低显著度颜色干扰物的 P。本研究使用已建立的抑制行为测量方法寻找支持显著度触发抑制的证据。与 Gaspar 等人一样,我们的参与者在九个背景圆圈中搜索一个黄色目标圆圈,其中有时包括一个具有独特颜色的圆圈。干扰物相对于背景圆圈的显著度高低不同。问题是高显著度颜色是否会比低显著度颜色被更强烈地主动抑制。这是通过捕获探针范式来评估的。在 33%的试验中,探针字母出现在彩色圆圈内,参与者需要报告这些字母。如果高显著度颜色被更强烈地抑制,那么在有高显著度颜色的位置,探针回忆的准确性应该低于在有低显著度颜色的位置。实验 1 没有发现这种效果。在解决可能的地板效应后,实验 2 也观察到了类似的发现。这些发现表明,主动抑制不是由显著度引起的。我们提出,P 不仅反映了主动抑制,还反映了被动抑制。

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