Sequential modulation of distractor-interference produced by semantic generalization of stimulus features

Sequential modulation of distractor-interference produced by semantic generalization of stimulus features
复制标题

DOI:
10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01271
复制
发表时间:
2014-11-14
影响因子:
3.8
通讯作者:
Jacobsen, Thomas
Jacobsen, Thomas
中科院分区:
心理学3区
文献类型:
--
作者:
Wendt, Mike;Luna-Rodriguez, Aquiles;Jacobsen, Thomas

文献摘要

被引文献

相似文献

与干扰相关的干扰的顺序调制(即,与一致的前驱试验相比,不一致后的一致性效应降低,又名格拉顿效应)已被用来反映冲突引起的注意力集中。为了驳回基于低级特征的整合和检索的替代解释,对刺激和响应特征序列进行实验控制非常重要。这是通过仅考虑与完整功能更改相关的试验来实现的。此外,来自两个不同感知维度(例如刺激位置和形状)的干扰因素已被组合在同一个实验中,以研究冲突适应的特异性与普遍性问题。使用这种方法,原则上可以在不忽略来自特征重复试验的数据的情况下进行特征序列控制。然而,当干扰维度在语义上重叠时,这种控制可能是不够的。在两个实验中,我们发现了与以下假设一致的证据:刺激特征的语义概括(例如在左侧位置呈现的刺激和指向左侧的刺激形状之间)可能会产生维度间格拉顿效应。这些发现对使用语义相关的干扰维度时推断广义注意力冲突适应提出了质疑。
Sequential modulations of distractor-related interference (i.e., reduced congruency effect after incongruent as compared to congruent predecessor trials, a.k.a. Gratton effect) have been taken to reflect conflict-induced attentional focusing. To dismiss an alternative interpretation based on integration and retrieval of low-level features, it is important to exert experimental control of stimulus and response feature sequences. This has been achieved by considering only trials associated with complete feature changes. Furthermore, distractors from two different perceptual dimensions, such as stimulus location and shape, have been combined in the same experiment to investigate the question of specificity vs. generality of conflict adaptation. With this method feature sequence control can be exerted, in principle, without disregarding data from feature repetition trials. However, such control may be insufficient when the distractor dimensions overlap semantically. In two experiments we found evidence consistent with the assumption that semantic generalization of stimulus features, such as between a stimulus presented at a left-sided location and a stimulus shape pointing to the left, may yield a between-dimension Gratton effect. These findings raise doubts about inferring generalized attentional conflict adaptation when semantically related distractor dimensions are used.