实验者在场是否影响言语工作记忆?

IF 2.3 Q1 Psychology
Journal of Cognition Pub Date : 2025-09-02 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.5334/joc.461
Valérie Camos, Jonathan Jubin, Clément Belletier
{"title":"实验者在场是否影响言语工作记忆?","authors":"Valérie Camos, Jonathan Jubin, Clément Belletier","doi":"10.5334/joc.461","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Recent studies showed that the presence of the experimenter hinders executive functions. Belletier and Camos (2018) extended these findings to working memory, reporting a detrimental effect of the experimenter presence only when participants performed an aloud concurrent articulation during maintenance. Under such a condition, participants likely relied on an attentional maintenance mechanism rather that an articulatory mechanism, supporting the account of a capture of attention by the social presence. However, other results using the Stroop Task demonstrate an improvement on executive functions (Garcia-Marques & Fernandes, 2024, for a meta-analysis). Thus, the present study aimed at reassessing the impact of experimenter's presence reported by Belletier and Camos (2018) on a larger sample, with a within-subject manipulation of concurrent articulation, a variation in the secondary task, and the addition of another type of concurrent articulation. In the present study, participants alone or in the presence of the experimenter performed a Brown-Peterson task in which they maintained letters during a 12-second interval, during which they either stayed silent, uttered aloud, or whispered non-sense syllables. They had also to perform either no secondary task, a parity or a location judgement task. Results confirmed Belletier and Camos' (2018) findings, showing that the experimenter presence hindered memory performance when participants performed a secondary task under any type of concurrent articulation. A silent context or the absence of secondary task preserved recall from the effect of experimenter's presence.</p>","PeriodicalId":32728,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cognition","volume":"8 1","pages":"47"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12412451/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Does the Experimenter Presence Affect Verbal Working Memory?\",\"authors\":\"Valérie Camos, Jonathan Jubin, Clément Belletier\",\"doi\":\"10.5334/joc.461\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Recent studies showed that the presence of the experimenter hinders executive functions. Belletier and Camos (2018) extended these findings to working memory, reporting a detrimental effect of the experimenter presence only when participants performed an aloud concurrent articulation during maintenance. Under such a condition, participants likely relied on an attentional maintenance mechanism rather that an articulatory mechanism, supporting the account of a capture of attention by the social presence. However, other results using the Stroop Task demonstrate an improvement on executive functions (Garcia-Marques & Fernandes, 2024, for a meta-analysis). Thus, the present study aimed at reassessing the impact of experimenter's presence reported by Belletier and Camos (2018) on a larger sample, with a within-subject manipulation of concurrent articulation, a variation in the secondary task, and the addition of another type of concurrent articulation. In the present study, participants alone or in the presence of the experimenter performed a Brown-Peterson task in which they maintained letters during a 12-second interval, during which they either stayed silent, uttered aloud, or whispered non-sense syllables. They had also to perform either no secondary task, a parity or a location judgement task. Results confirmed Belletier and Camos' (2018) findings, showing that the experimenter presence hindered memory performance when participants performed a secondary task under any type of concurrent articulation. A silent context or the absence of secondary task preserved recall from the effect of experimenter's presence.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":32728,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Cognition\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"47\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12412451/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Cognition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5334/joc.461\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Psychology\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5334/joc.461","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Psychology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

最近的研究表明,实验者的存在阻碍了执行功能。Belletier和Camos(2018)将这些发现扩展到工作记忆,报告了只有当参与者在维持期间进行大声并发发音时,实验者的存在才会产生有害影响。在这种情况下,参与者可能依赖于注意力维持机制,而不是发音机制,这支持了社会存在吸引注意力的说法。然而,使用Stroop任务的其他结果表明执行功能有所改善(Garcia-Marques & Fernandes, 2024,进行荟萃分析)。因此,本研究旨在重新评估Belletier和Camos(2018)报告的实验者的存在对更大样本的影响,包括受试者内部对并发发音的操纵,次要任务的变化,以及另一种类型的并发发音的增加。在目前的研究中,参与者单独或在实验者在场的情况下完成了一个布朗-彼得森任务,在这个任务中,他们在12秒的间隔内保持字母,在此期间他们要么保持沉默,大声说话,要么低声说出无意义的音节。他们还必须不执行次要任务,或者执行一个对等或位置判断任务。结果证实了Belletier和Camos(2018)的发现,即当参与者在任何类型的并发发音下执行次要任务时,实验者的存在都会阻碍他们的记忆表现。沉默的环境或次要任务的缺失使回忆不受实验者在场的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Does the Experimenter Presence Affect Verbal Working Memory?

Does the Experimenter Presence Affect Verbal Working Memory?

Does the Experimenter Presence Affect Verbal Working Memory?

Recent studies showed that the presence of the experimenter hinders executive functions. Belletier and Camos (2018) extended these findings to working memory, reporting a detrimental effect of the experimenter presence only when participants performed an aloud concurrent articulation during maintenance. Under such a condition, participants likely relied on an attentional maintenance mechanism rather that an articulatory mechanism, supporting the account of a capture of attention by the social presence. However, other results using the Stroop Task demonstrate an improvement on executive functions (Garcia-Marques & Fernandes, 2024, for a meta-analysis). Thus, the present study aimed at reassessing the impact of experimenter's presence reported by Belletier and Camos (2018) on a larger sample, with a within-subject manipulation of concurrent articulation, a variation in the secondary task, and the addition of another type of concurrent articulation. In the present study, participants alone or in the presence of the experimenter performed a Brown-Peterson task in which they maintained letters during a 12-second interval, during which they either stayed silent, uttered aloud, or whispered non-sense syllables. They had also to perform either no secondary task, a parity or a location judgement task. Results confirmed Belletier and Camos' (2018) findings, showing that the experimenter presence hindered memory performance when participants performed a secondary task under any type of concurrent articulation. A silent context or the absence of secondary task preserved recall from the effect of experimenter's presence.

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
Journal of Cognition
Journal of Cognition Psychology-Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
43
审稿时长
6 weeks
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信