Memory for to-be-performed tasks versus memory for performed tasks
Memory for to-be-performed tasks versus memory for performed tasks
复制标题
DOI：
10.3758/bf03197289
复制
发表时间：
1997-01-01
影响因子：
2.4
通讯作者：
Engelkamp, J
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Engelkamp, J
对受试者执行的任务（即受试者公开执行的简单动作，例如举笔）的记忆优于对口头任务（即受试者只听动作短语）的记忆。在这里，我研究了这种效果是否取决于实际表现，或者当只有意图执行任务时是否也会出现。 Koriat、Ben-Zur 和 Nussbaum（1990）发现，在测试中执行项目的意图比口头任务更能增强自由回忆。然而，Brooks 和 Gardiner (1994) 未能重复这一发现。在四个实验中，我试图通过比较不同条件下受试者执行的任务、待执行的任务和言语任务来调和这种差异。结果取决于是否使用受试者内设计或受试者间设计。在受试者间设计中，受试者对已执行任务的记忆优于对待执行任务的记忆，这两者都比口头任务带来更好的回忆表现。相比之下，在受试者内部设计中，对即将执行的任务的记忆与对言语任务的记忆没有什么不同。这些结果与测试模式一致还是不一致无关。因此，Koriat 等人的研究结果不一致。布鲁克斯和加德纳的观点似乎是由于所使用的设计，指出编码过程是关键变量。目前的结果被解释为表明，在研究中实际执行的动作比仅在测试中执行动作的意图提供了更多的信息。
Memory for subject-performed tasks-that is, for simple actions such as Lifting a pen, which subjects perform overtly-is better than memory for verbal tasks-that is, when subjects only listen to the action phrases. Here I investigated whether this effect depends on actual performance or whether it also shows up when there is only an intention to perform the task. Koriat, Ben-Zur, and Nussbaum (1990) found that the intention to perform items at test enhanced free recall more than did verbal tasks. Brooks and Gardiner (1994), however, were not able to replicate this finding. Ln four experiments, I attempted to reconcile this discrepancy by comparing subject-performed tasks, to-be-performed tasks, and verbal tasks under different conditions. The outcome depended on whether a within-subjects design or a between-subjects design was used. In the between-subjects design, memory for subject-performed tasks was better than memory for to-be-performed tasks, and both of these led to better recall performance than did verbal tasks. In a within-subjects design, in contrast, memory for to-be-performed tasks was no different from memory for verbal tasks. These results were independent of whether the test mode was congruent or incongruent. Thus, the discrepant findings of Koriat et al. and of Brooks and Gardiner seem to be due to the design used, pointing to encoding processes as the critical variable. The present results are interpreted to show that actual performance of actions at study provides more information than does only the intention to perform actions at test.