Kallman H J, Massaro D W
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1983 Apr;9(2):312-27. doi: 10.1037//0278-7393.9.2.312.
This article considers the use of auditory backward recognition masking (ABRM) and stimulus suffix experiments as indexes of preperceptual auditory storage. In the first part of the article, two ABRM experiments that failed to demonstrate a mask disinhibition effect found previously in stimulus suffix experiments are reported. The failure to demonstrate mask disinhibition is inconsistent with an explanation of ABRM in terms of lateral inhibition. In the second part of the article, evidence is presented to support the conclusion that the suffix effect involves the contributions of later processing stages and does not provide an uncontaminated index of preperceptual storage. In contrast, it is claimed that ABRM experiments provide the most direct index of the temporal course of perceptual recognition. Partial-report tasks and other paradigms are also evaluated in terms of their contributions to an understanding of preperceptual auditory storage. Differences between interruption and integration masking are discussed along with the role of preperceptual auditory storage in speech perception.
本文探讨了使用听觉逆向识别掩蔽（ABRM）和刺激后缀实验作为前感知听觉存储指标的情况。在文章的第一部分，报告了两项未能证明先前在刺激后缀实验中发现的掩蔽去抑制效应的ABRM实验。未能证明掩蔽去抑制与基于侧向抑制对ABRM的解释不一致。在文章的第二部分，提供了证据来支持这样的结论：后缀效应涉及后期加工阶段的贡献，并且不能提供前感知存储的纯净指标。相比之下，有人声称ABRM实验提供了感知识别时间进程的最直接指标。还根据部分报告任务和其他范式对理解前感知听觉存储的贡献对它们进行了评估。讨论了中断掩蔽和整合掩蔽之间的差异以及前感知听觉存储在语音感知中的作用。
