Lansman M, Farr S, Hunt E
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1984 Apr;10(2):195-204. doi: 10.1037//0096-1523.10.2.195.
This research deals with the relationship between expectancy and attention. In two experiments, expectancy concerning the modality of a probe stimulus was manipulated. In Experiment 1, the frequencies of probes in auditory and visual modalities were varied. In Experiment 2, a cue prior to each trial indicated the relative probabilities of the two types of probes. In both experiments, expectancy effects were observed in a single-task condition during which the subject's only task was to respond to the probes and in a dual-task condition in which probes were inserted in the study phase of a pattern recognition task. If maintaining an expectancy requires attention, then diverting attention from the probe task to the pattern recognition task should have attentuated the effects of expectancy. In fact, the pattern recognition task did not alter frequency effects but did significantly reduce cueing effects. We conclude that expectancy as determined by frequency results from automatic activation, whereas expectancy as determined by cueing involves attention.
本研究探讨了预期与注意力之间的关系。在两项实验中，对有关探测刺激模态的预期进行了操控。在实验1中，改变了听觉和视觉模态下探测刺激的频率。在实验2中，每次试验前的一个线索表明了两种类型探测刺激的相对概率。在两项实验中，在单任务条件下（受试者唯一的任务是对探测刺激做出反应）以及双任务条件下（在模式识别任务的学习阶段插入探测刺激）均观察到了预期效应。如果维持预期需要注意力，那么将注意力从探测任务转移到模式识别任务应该会减弱预期效应。事实上，模式识别任务并没有改变频率效应，但确实显著降低了线索提示效应。我们得出结论，由频率决定的预期源于自动激活，而由线索提示决定的预期涉及注意力。
