用多重线索范式检验记忆编码成本理论。

IF 1.5 4区 心理学 Q4 NEUROSCIENCES
Jian Li , Huixin Song , Xiaoqi Huang , Yingtao Fu , Chenxiao Guan , Luo Chen , Mowei Shen , Hui Chen
{"title":"用多重线索范式检验记忆编码成本理论。","authors":"Jian Li ,&nbsp;Huixin Song ,&nbsp;Xiaoqi Huang ,&nbsp;Yingtao Fu ,&nbsp;Chenxiao Guan ,&nbsp;Luo Chen ,&nbsp;Mowei Shen ,&nbsp;Hui Chen","doi":"10.1016/j.visres.2025.108552","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Recent developments have introduced the Memory Encoding Cost (MEC) theory to explain the role of attention in exogenous spatial cueing effects. According to this theory, the cost effect (when comparing invalid to neutral cues) arises from attentional suppression resulting from memory encoding of the cue. Conversely, the benefit effect (when comparing valid to neutral cues) is thought to result from a combination of attentional facilitation caused by the cue and encoding-related attentional suppression. This study tests the MEC theory by investigating whether encoding-induced cost increases as the number of cues presented increases. In Experiment 1, participants identified a target letter, which was occasionally preceded by one or three exogenous cues. The results showed that multiple cues resulted in a larger cost effect and a smaller (or even reversed) benefit effect compared to a single cue. This asymmetry between cost and benefit effects was consistently observed across experiments, even when controlling for factors like forward masking and target salience in Experiment 2, or using placeholders as in prior research in Experiment 3. These findings are more consistent with the MEC theory than with traditional attention models. In conclusion, our results provide strong support for the MEC theory, highlighting the importance of both attentional facilitation and encoding-induced suppression in explaining exogenous spatial cueing effects.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":23670,"journal":{"name":"Vision Research","volume":"228 ","pages":"Article 108552"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Testing the memory encoding cost theory using the multiple cues paradigm\",\"authors\":\"Jian Li ,&nbsp;Huixin Song ,&nbsp;Xiaoqi Huang ,&nbsp;Yingtao Fu ,&nbsp;Chenxiao Guan ,&nbsp;Luo Chen ,&nbsp;Mowei Shen ,&nbsp;Hui Chen\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.visres.2025.108552\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Recent developments have introduced the Memory Encoding Cost (MEC) theory to explain the role of attention in exogenous spatial cueing effects. According to this theory, the cost effect (when comparing invalid to neutral cues) arises from attentional suppression resulting from memory encoding of the cue. Conversely, the benefit effect (when comparing valid to neutral cues) is thought to result from a combination of attentional facilitation caused by the cue and encoding-related attentional suppression. This study tests the MEC theory by investigating whether encoding-induced cost increases as the number of cues presented increases. In Experiment 1, participants identified a target letter, which was occasionally preceded by one or three exogenous cues. The results showed that multiple cues resulted in a larger cost effect and a smaller (or even reversed) benefit effect compared to a single cue. This asymmetry between cost and benefit effects was consistently observed across experiments, even when controlling for factors like forward masking and target salience in Experiment 2, or using placeholders as in prior research in Experiment 3. These findings are more consistent with the MEC theory than with traditional attention models. In conclusion, our results provide strong support for the MEC theory, highlighting the importance of both attentional facilitation and encoding-induced suppression in explaining exogenous spatial cueing effects.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23670,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Vision Research\",\"volume\":\"228 \",\"pages\":\"Article 108552\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Vision Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0042698925000136\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"NEUROSCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vision Research","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0042698925000136","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

最近的研究引入了记忆编码成本(MEC)理论来解释注意在外生空间提示效应中的作用。根据这一理论,成本效应(当比较无效线索和中性线索时)是由线索的记忆编码引起的注意抑制引起的。相反,利益效应(当将有效线索与中性线索进行比较时)被认为是由线索引起的注意促进和编码相关的注意抑制共同作用的结果。本研究通过调查编码诱导成本是否随着提示数量的增加而增加,来验证MEC理论。在实验1中,参与者识别一个目标字母,这个字母之前偶尔会有一个或三个外源线索。结果表明,与单一线索相比,多个线索导致的成本效应更大,而收益效应更小(甚至相反)。即使在实验2中控制了前向掩蔽和目标显著性等因素,或者在实验3中使用占位符,这种成本和收益效应之间的不对称也在实验中得到了一致的观察。与传统的注意力模型相比,这些发现更符合MEC理论。总之,我们的研究结果为MEC理论提供了强有力的支持,强调了注意促进和编码诱导抑制在解释外源性空间提示效应中的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Testing the memory encoding cost theory using the multiple cues paradigm
Recent developments have introduced the Memory Encoding Cost (MEC) theory to explain the role of attention in exogenous spatial cueing effects. According to this theory, the cost effect (when comparing invalid to neutral cues) arises from attentional suppression resulting from memory encoding of the cue. Conversely, the benefit effect (when comparing valid to neutral cues) is thought to result from a combination of attentional facilitation caused by the cue and encoding-related attentional suppression. This study tests the MEC theory by investigating whether encoding-induced cost increases as the number of cues presented increases. In Experiment 1, participants identified a target letter, which was occasionally preceded by one or three exogenous cues. The results showed that multiple cues resulted in a larger cost effect and a smaller (or even reversed) benefit effect compared to a single cue. This asymmetry between cost and benefit effects was consistently observed across experiments, even when controlling for factors like forward masking and target salience in Experiment 2, or using placeholders as in prior research in Experiment 3. These findings are more consistent with the MEC theory than with traditional attention models. In conclusion, our results provide strong support for the MEC theory, highlighting the importance of both attentional facilitation and encoding-induced suppression in explaining exogenous spatial cueing effects.
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
Vision Research
Vision Research 医学-神经科学
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
16.70%
发文量
111
审稿时长
66 days
期刊介绍: Vision Research is a journal devoted to the functional aspects of human, vertebrate and invertebrate vision and publishes experimental and observational studies, reviews, and theoretical and computational analyses. Vision Research also publishes clinical studies relevant to normal visual function and basic research relevant to visual dysfunction or its clinical investigation. Functional aspects of vision is interpreted broadly, ranging from molecular and cellular function to perception and behavior. Detailed descriptions are encouraged but enough introductory background should be included for non-specialists. Theoretical and computational papers should give a sense of order to the facts or point to new verifiable observations. Papers dealing with questions in the history of vision science should stress the development of ideas in the field.
×
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