Neutral and threatening distracter word stimuli are unnecessarily stored in working memory but do not differ in their degree of working memory storage.
Neutral and threatening distracter word stimuli are unnecessarily stored in working memory but do not differ in their degree of working memory storage.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.biopsycho.2021.108091
复制
发表时间：
2021-05
影响因子：
2.6
通讯作者：
Larson, Christine L.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Ward, Richard T.;Lotfi, Salahadin;Stout, Daniel M.;Mattson, Sofia;Lee, Han-Joo;Larson, Christine L.
有证据表明，与中性刺激相比，威胁性刺激会引起注意偏差，导致随后在工作记忆中存储。目前的研究考察了威胁性和中性词干扰如何影响注意力，以及这如何影响这些与任务无关的刺激物在工作记忆中的不必要存储。当被试完成使用单词刺激的侧化变化检测任务时，我们分别测量了N2pc和对侧延迟活动（CDA），这两个事件相关电位（ERPs）分别反映了注意选择和在WM中维持的项目数量。我们的研究结果重复了证明单词刺激具有CDA效应的工作，并发现干扰词不必要地存储在工作记忆中。然而，我们观察到注意力偏差和工作记忆存储在不同的干扰词条件下没有显著差异，焦虑的个体差异与这些过程无关。贝叶斯因子分析支持这些无效效应，表明中性和威胁性干扰词之间不太可能存在差异。
Evidence suggests that threatening stimuli induce attentional biases compared to neutral stimuli, leading to subsequent storage in working memory. The current study examined how threatening versus neutral word distracters influence attention, and how this affects the unnecessary storage of these task-irrelevant stimuli in working memory. We measured the N2pc and contralateral delay activity (CDA), two event-related potentials (ERPs) that index attentional selection and the number of items maintained in WM, respectively, as participants completed a lateralized change detection task using word stimuli. Our results replicated work demonstrating a CDA effect for word stimuli, and found that distracter words are unnecessarily stored in working memory. However, we observed non-significant differences in attentional bias and working memory storage between distracter word conditions, and individual variation in anxiety was not associated with these processes. Bayes Factor analyses supported these null effects, suggesting that differences between neutral and threatening distracter words are unlikely.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
7.2
作者：
Cowan N
通讯作者：
Cowan N
影响因子：
3.2
作者：
Adam KCS;Robison MK;Vogel EK
通讯作者：
Vogel EK
影响因子：
2.6
作者：
Bretherton, P. M.;Eysenck, M. W.;Holmes, A.
通讯作者：
Holmes, A.
影响因子：
12.8
作者：
Cisler JM;Koster EH
通讯作者：
Koster EH
影响因子：
4.1
作者：
Algom, D;Chajut, E;Lev, S
通讯作者：
Lev, S