Zahn T P, Roberts B R, Schooler C, Cohen R
Laboratory of Brain and Cognition, National Institute of Mental Health, Bethesda, Maryland 20892-1366, USA.
J Abnorm Psychol. 1998 May;107(2):328-37. doi: 10.1037//0021-843x.107.2.328.
Saccadic reaction time (RT) has been shown to be unimpaired in schizophrenia. Could this be due to its not requiring controlled information processing? The authors gave 49 schizophrenia patients and 34 controls manual and saccadic RT tasks with preparatory intervals of 1, 3, and 5 s given in regular and irregular sequences. If saccades require mainly automatic processes, they should not be affected by variations in the preparatory interval that are mediated by controlled processing. The manual task showed typical slower RT and larger preparatory interval effects in patients than in controls. Although the saccadic task showed significant effects of both the preparatory interval and the preparatory interval on the preceding trial similar in kind to those in manual RT, there were no group differences in these or in RT. The results are attributed to greater stimulus-response compatibility in the saccadic task, which puts fewer demands on working memory.
研究表明,精神分裂症患者的扫视反应时间(RT)并未受损。这是否是因为扫视反应不需要受控的信息处理呢?作者让49名精神分裂症患者和34名对照组人员进行手动和扫视RT任务,准备间隔分别为1秒、3秒和5秒,且按规则和不规则顺序给出。如果扫视主要需要自动过程,那么它们不应受到由受控处理介导的准备间隔变化的影响。手动任务显示,患者的RT通常比对照组慢,且准备间隔效应更大。尽管扫视任务显示出准备间隔及其前一试次的准备间隔都有显著影响,且与手动RT中的影响类似,但在这些方面或RT上没有组间差异。结果归因于扫视任务中更高的刺激 - 反应兼容性,这对工作记忆的要求较低。