连续注意对连续记忆:前后线索回忆的心理不应期。

IF 3 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY
Gordon D. Logan, Simon D. Lilburn, Jana E. Ulrich
{"title":"连续注意对连续记忆:前后线索回忆的心理不应期。","authors":"Gordon D. Logan,&nbsp;Simon D. Lilburn,&nbsp;Jana E. Ulrich","doi":"10.1016/j.cogpsych.2023.101583","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Guided by the conjecture that memory retrieval is attention turned inward, we examined serial attention in serial memory, combining the psychological refractory period (PRP) procedure from attention research with cued recall of two items from brief six-item lists. We report six experiments showing robust PRP effects in cued recall from memory (1–4) and cued report from perceptual displays (5–6), which suggest that memory retrieval requires the same attentional bottleneck as “retrieval” from perception. There were strong direction effects in each memory experiment. Response time (RT) was shorter and accuracy was higher when the cues occurred in the forward direction (left-to-right, top-to-bottom, first-to-last), replicating differences between forward and backward serial recall. Cue positions had strong effects on RT and accuracy in the memory experiments (1–4). The pattern suggested that subjects find cued items in memory by stepping through the list from the beginning or the end, with a preference for starting at the beginning. The perceptual experiments (5–6) showed weak effects of position that were more consistent with direct access. In all experiments, the distance between the cues in the list (lag) had weak effects, suggesting that subjects searched for each cue from the beginning or end of the list more often than they moved through the list from the first cue to the second. Direction, distance, and lag effects on RT and inter-response interval changed with SOA in a manner that suggested they affect bottleneck or pre-bottleneck processes that create and execute a plan for successive retrievals. We conclude that sequential retrieval from memory and sequential attention to perception engage the same computations and we show how computational models of memory can be interpreted as models of attention focused on memory.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":50669,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Psychology","volume":"145 ","pages":"Article 101583"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Serial attention to serial memory: The psychological refractory period in forward and backward cued recall\",\"authors\":\"Gordon D. Logan,&nbsp;Simon D. Lilburn,&nbsp;Jana E. Ulrich\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.cogpsych.2023.101583\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Guided by the conjecture that memory retrieval is attention turned inward, we examined serial attention in serial memory, combining the psychological refractory period (PRP) procedure from attention research with cued recall of two items from brief six-item lists. We report six experiments showing robust PRP effects in cued recall from memory (1–4) and cued report from perceptual displays (5–6), which suggest that memory retrieval requires the same attentional bottleneck as “retrieval” from perception. There were strong direction effects in each memory experiment. Response time (RT) was shorter and accuracy was higher when the cues occurred in the forward direction (left-to-right, top-to-bottom, first-to-last), replicating differences between forward and backward serial recall. Cue positions had strong effects on RT and accuracy in the memory experiments (1–4). The pattern suggested that subjects find cued items in memory by stepping through the list from the beginning or the end, with a preference for starting at the beginning. The perceptual experiments (5–6) showed weak effects of position that were more consistent with direct access. In all experiments, the distance between the cues in the list (lag) had weak effects, suggesting that subjects searched for each cue from the beginning or end of the list more often than they moved through the list from the first cue to the second. Direction, distance, and lag effects on RT and inter-response interval changed with SOA in a manner that suggested they affect bottleneck or pre-bottleneck processes that create and execute a plan for successive retrievals. We conclude that sequential retrieval from memory and sequential attention to perception engage the same computations and we show how computational models of memory can be interpreted as models of attention focused on memory.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50669,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cognitive Psychology\",\"volume\":\"145 \",\"pages\":\"Article 101583\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cognitive Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010028523000415\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognitive Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010028523000415","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在记忆检索是注意力向内转向的猜想的指导下,我们将注意力研究中的心理不应期(PRP)过程与从简短的六个项目列表中提示回忆两个项目相结合,检验了连续记忆中的连续注意。我们报告了六个实验,显示了来自记忆的提示回忆(1-4)和来自感知显示的提示报告(5-6)中强大的PRP效应,这表明记忆检索需要与来自感知的“检索”相同的注意瓶颈。每个记忆实验都有很强的方向效应。当线索发生在正向(从左到右、从上到下、从前到后)时,反应时间(RT)更短,准确率更高,复制了正向和反向序列回忆之间的差异。提示位置对记忆实验中的RT和准确性有很强的影响(1-4)。该模式表明,受试者通过从头或尾遍历列表来找到记忆中的提示项目,并倾向于从头开始。感知实验(5-6)显示,位置的影响较弱,更符合直接访问。在所有实验中,列表中线索之间的距离(滞后)影响较弱,这表明受试者从列表的开头或结尾搜索每个线索的频率高于他们从第一个线索到第二个线索的搜索频率。方向、距离和滞后对RT和响应间隔的影响随着SOA的变化而变化,表明它们会影响创建和执行连续检索计划的瓶颈或瓶颈前流程。我们得出结论,从记忆的顺序检索和从注意力到感知的顺序检索涉及相同的计算,我们展示了记忆的计算模型如何被解释为专注于记忆的注意力模型。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Serial attention to serial memory: The psychological refractory period in forward and backward cued recall

Guided by the conjecture that memory retrieval is attention turned inward, we examined serial attention in serial memory, combining the psychological refractory period (PRP) procedure from attention research with cued recall of two items from brief six-item lists. We report six experiments showing robust PRP effects in cued recall from memory (1–4) and cued report from perceptual displays (5–6), which suggest that memory retrieval requires the same attentional bottleneck as “retrieval” from perception. There were strong direction effects in each memory experiment. Response time (RT) was shorter and accuracy was higher when the cues occurred in the forward direction (left-to-right, top-to-bottom, first-to-last), replicating differences between forward and backward serial recall. Cue positions had strong effects on RT and accuracy in the memory experiments (1–4). The pattern suggested that subjects find cued items in memory by stepping through the list from the beginning or the end, with a preference for starting at the beginning. The perceptual experiments (5–6) showed weak effects of position that were more consistent with direct access. In all experiments, the distance between the cues in the list (lag) had weak effects, suggesting that subjects searched for each cue from the beginning or end of the list more often than they moved through the list from the first cue to the second. Direction, distance, and lag effects on RT and inter-response interval changed with SOA in a manner that suggested they affect bottleneck or pre-bottleneck processes that create and execute a plan for successive retrievals. We conclude that sequential retrieval from memory and sequential attention to perception engage the same computations and we show how computational models of memory can be interpreted as models of attention focused on memory.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Cognitive Psychology
Cognitive Psychology 医学-心理学
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
3.80%
发文量
29
审稿时长
50 days
期刊介绍: Cognitive Psychology is concerned with advances in the study of attention, memory, language processing, perception, problem solving, and thinking. Cognitive Psychology specializes in extensive articles that have a major impact on cognitive theory and provide new theoretical advances. Research Areas include: • Artificial intelligence • Developmental psychology • Linguistics • Neurophysiology • Social psychology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信