), 尹述飞2 1华中师范大学心理学院, 武汉 430079
2湖北大学教育学院心理学系, 武汉 430062
收稿日期:2020-05-09出版日期:2021-04-15发布日期:2021-02-22基金资助:国家自然科学基金青年基金(31700957);教育部人文社会科学研究青年项目(17YJC190014)Positivity effects in working memory: The effects of emotional valence and task relevance
DING Linjie1, LI Xu1(), YIN Shufei2 1School of Psychology, Central China Normal University, Wuhan 430079, China
2Department of Psychology, Faculty of Education, Hubei University, Wuhan 430062, China
Received:2020-05-09Online:2021-04-15Published:2021-02-22摘要/Abstract
摘要： 积极效应指相比于年轻人, 老年人更倾向于优先加工积极情绪刺激而非消极情绪刺激。近年来工作记忆的研究发现积极效应会受到情绪效价与任务相关性的影响：情绪效价作为任务相关属性的研究支持工作记忆中存在积极效应, 具体表现为老年人对积极情绪刺激记忆的增强, 以及对消极情绪刺激记忆的减弱; 情绪效价作为工作记忆任务无关属性的研究相对较少, 且未发现一致的积极效应, 提示情绪效价及任务相关性均为影响工作记忆积极效应的关键因素。脑成像的研究初步表明, 工作记忆中情绪加工上的年龄效应与背侧执行系统和腹侧情绪系统的随龄功能变化有关。社会情绪选择理论与双竞争模型对工作记忆中的积极效应具备较大的解释力, 而动态整合理论尚缺乏实证研究支持。未来研究可进一步探究老年人工作记忆不同阶段情绪加工的特点, 澄清不同情绪材料内在编码过程上的差异对积极效应发生机制的潜在影响, 探讨情绪效价及任务相关性影响工作记忆积极效应的关键神经环路, 并揭示情绪工作记忆训练提升老年人认知功能与情绪体验的内在机制及其潜在应用价值。
图/表 2
表1情绪效价作为工作记忆任务相关属性的研究
| 研究者(年份) | 平均年龄(或年龄范围) | 样本量 | 研究设计 | 研究结果(因变量：正确率) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YA vs. OA | YA vs. OA | 范式 | 刺激材料 | 效价 | 组内分析结果 | 组间差异结果 | |
| Bermudez & Souza, | 26.17 vs. 70.96 | 24 vs. 24 | 延迟匹配任务 | 图片 | 积极/中性/消极 | YA：积极=中性=消极 OA：积极、中性>消极; 积极=中性 | - |
| Hartley et al. Study1 | 19.45 vs. 72.93 | 31 vs. 31 | 延迟匹配任务 | 面孔 | 高兴/悲伤/愤怒/恐惧/惊讶/厌恶 | - | 高兴/悲伤/愤怒/恐惧/ 惊讶/厌恶：OA=YA |
| Hartley et al. Study3 | 20.38 vs. 75.41 | 24 vs. 24 | 延迟匹配任务 | 面孔 | 情绪/非情绪 | - | 情绪、非情绪：OA=YA |
| Majerus & D'Argembeau, Study2 | 24~30 vs. 60~84 | 15 vs. 15 | 延迟匹配任务 | 词汇 | 积极/中性/消极 | OA、YA：积极>消极、中性; 消极=中性 | 积极/中性/消极：OA<YA |
| Majerus & D'Argembeau, Study3 | 24~30 vs. 60~84 | 15 vs. 15 | 延迟匹配任务 | 词汇 | 积极/中性/消极 | YA：积极>中性; 消极>中性 OA：积极>中性; 消极=中性 | - |
| Mammarella et al. | 24.97 vs. 64.70 | 35 vs. 37 | 操作广度任务 | 词汇 | 积极/中性/消极 | YA：消极>积极、中性; 积极=中性 OA：消极>积极、中性; 积极>中性 | 积极：OA=YA; 消极：OA=YA; 中性：OA<YA; |
| Mikels et al. | 22.35 vs. 72.50 | 20 vs. 20 | 情感保持任务 | 图片 | 积极/消极 | YA：消极>积极 OA：积极>消极 | 积极：OA>YA 消极：- |
| Mok et al. | 23.42 vs. 69.25 | 54 vs. 51 | 短时记忆任务 | 面孔 | 高兴/恐惧 | OA、YA：高兴>恐惧 | 高兴、恐惧：OA<YA |
| Sava et al. Study1 | 19.84 vs. 74.33 vs. 78.82 (AD) | 25 vs. 21 vs. 17 (AD) | 延迟匹配任务 | 面孔 | 高兴/中性/悲伤 | YA：高兴=中性=悲伤 OA：高兴>中性、悲伤; 中性=悲伤 AD：高兴>中性、悲伤; 中性=悲伤 | 高兴：OA、YA>AD; OA=YA 中性、悲伤：OA、AD<YA; OA=AD |
| Sava et al. Study2 | 22.4 vs. 80.81 vs. 84.22 (AD) | 21 vs. 21 vs.18 (AD) | 延迟匹配任务 | 面孔 | 高兴/中性/愤怒 | YA：高兴=中性=愤怒 OA：高兴、中性>愤怒; 高兴=中性 AD：高兴>中性、悲伤; 中性=愤怒 | 高兴：AD<YA; OA=YA; OA=AD 中性：OA、AD<YA; OA>AD 愤怒：OA、AD<YA; OA=AD |
| Sv?rdet al. | 25.20 vs. 70.50 | 40 vs. 35 | 短时记忆任务 | 面孔 | 高兴/愤怒 | OA、YA：高兴>愤怒 | 高兴、愤怒：OA<YA |
表1情绪效价作为工作记忆任务相关属性的研究
| 研究者(年份) | 平均年龄(或年龄范围) | 样本量 | 研究设计 | 研究结果(因变量：正确率) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YA vs. OA | YA vs. OA | 范式 | 刺激材料 | 效价 | 组内分析结果 | 组间差异结果 | |
| Bermudez & Souza, | 26.17 vs. 70.96 | 24 vs. 24 | 延迟匹配任务 | 图片 | 积极/中性/消极 | YA：积极=中性=消极 OA：积极、中性>消极; 积极=中性 | - |
| Hartley et al. Study1 | 19.45 vs. 72.93 | 31 vs. 31 | 延迟匹配任务 | 面孔 | 高兴/悲伤/愤怒/恐惧/惊讶/厌恶 | - | 高兴/悲伤/愤怒/恐惧/ 惊讶/厌恶：OA=YA |
| Hartley et al. Study3 | 20.38 vs. 75.41 | 24 vs. 24 | 延迟匹配任务 | 面孔 | 情绪/非情绪 | - | 情绪、非情绪：OA=YA |
| Majerus & D'Argembeau, Study2 | 24~30 vs. 60~84 | 15 vs. 15 | 延迟匹配任务 | 词汇 | 积极/中性/消极 | OA、YA：积极>消极、中性; 消极=中性 | 积极/中性/消极：OA<YA |
| Majerus & D'Argembeau, Study3 | 24~30 vs. 60~84 | 15 vs. 15 | 延迟匹配任务 | 词汇 | 积极/中性/消极 | YA：积极>中性; 消极>中性 OA：积极>中性; 消极=中性 | - |
| Mammarella et al. | 24.97 vs. 64.70 | 35 vs. 37 | 操作广度任务 | 词汇 | 积极/中性/消极 | YA：消极>积极、中性; 积极=中性 OA：消极>积极、中性; 积极>中性 | 积极：OA=YA; 消极：OA=YA; 中性：OA<YA; |
| Mikels et al. | 22.35 vs. 72.50 | 20 vs. 20 | 情感保持任务 | 图片 | 积极/消极 | YA：消极>积极 OA：积极>消极 | 积极：OA>YA 消极：- |
| Mok et al. | 23.42 vs. 69.25 | 54 vs. 51 | 短时记忆任务 | 面孔 | 高兴/恐惧 | OA、YA：高兴>恐惧 | 高兴、恐惧：OA<YA |
| Sava et al. Study1 | 19.84 vs. 74.33 vs. 78.82 (AD) | 25 vs. 21 vs. 17 (AD) | 延迟匹配任务 | 面孔 | 高兴/中性/悲伤 | YA：高兴=中性=悲伤 OA：高兴>中性、悲伤; 中性=悲伤 AD：高兴>中性、悲伤; 中性=悲伤 | 高兴：OA、YA>AD; OA=YA 中性、悲伤：OA、AD<YA; OA=AD |
| Sava et al. Study2 | 22.4 vs. 80.81 vs. 84.22 (AD) | 21 vs. 21 vs.18 (AD) | 延迟匹配任务 | 面孔 | 高兴/中性/愤怒 | YA：高兴=中性=愤怒 OA：高兴、中性>愤怒; 高兴=中性 AD：高兴>中性、悲伤; 中性=愤怒 | 高兴：AD<YA; OA=YA; OA=AD 中性：OA、AD<YA; OA>AD 愤怒：OA、AD<YA; OA=AD |
| Sv?rdet al. | 25.20 vs. 70.50 | 40 vs. 35 | 短时记忆任务 | 面孔 | 高兴/愤怒 | OA、YA：高兴>愤怒 | 高兴、愤怒：OA<YA |
表2情绪效价作为工作记忆任务无关属性的研究
| 研究者 (年份) | 平均年龄 (或年龄范围) | 样本量 | 研究设计 | 研究结果(因变量：正确率) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YA vs. OA | YA vs. OA | 范式 | 刺激材料 | 效价 | 任务描述 | 组内分析结果 | 组间差异结果 | |
| Belham et al. Study1 | 21.38 vs. 71.10 | 56 vs. 39 | 延迟再认任务 | 图片 | 积极/中性/消极 | 记忆刺激的空间位置; 忽略刺激的情绪效价 | YA：积极=中性=消极 OA：积极=中性=消极 | 积极/中性/消极：OA<YA |
| Belham et al. Study2 | 21.31 vs. 69.92 | 26 vs. 25 | 延迟再认任务 | 面孔 | 高兴/中性/愤怒 | 记忆刺激的空间位置; 忽略刺激的情绪效价 | YA：愤怒>高兴; 高兴=中性; 愤怒=中性 OA：愤怒>高兴; 高兴=中性; 愤怒=中性 | 高兴/中性/愤怒：OA<YA |
| Berger et al. | 25.03 vs. 68.60 | 31 vs. 31 | 2-back | 面孔 | 中性/愤怒 | 比较当前与两个试次前的刺激的情绪效价是否一致; 忽略n-1与n-3试次的刺激 | YA：愤怒=中性; OA：愤怒=中性; | 愤怒、中性：OA<YA |
| Borg et al. | 27.07 vs. 78.35 vs. 80.92 (AD) | 14 vs. 14 vs.14 (AD) | 短时记忆任务 | 图片 | 中性/消极 | 记忆刺激的空间位置; 忽略刺激的情绪效价 | YA：消极=中性; OA：消极<中性; AD：消极=中性 | 消极：OA、AD<YA; OA=AD 中性：OA、AD<YA; OA>AD |
| Hartley et al. Study2 | 20.04 vs. 74.43 | 32 vs. 30 | 延迟匹配任务 | 面孔 | 情绪 | 记忆面孔身份; 忽略面孔的情绪效价 | - | 情绪：OA<YA |
| Hartley et al. Study3 | 20.38 vs. 75.41 | 24 vs. 24 | 延迟匹配任务 | 面孔 | 情绪/非情绪 | 记忆面孔身份; 忽略面孔的情绪效价 | - | 情绪/非情绪：OA<YA |
| Truong & Yang, | 19.69 vs.73.25 | 36 vs. 36 | 延迟匹配任务 | 词汇 | 积极/中性/消极 | 记忆任务指定的情绪目标刺激; 忽略任务指定的情绪分心刺激 | YA：积极=中性=消极 OA：消极<积极、中性; 积极=中性 | 积极、中性：OA=YA 消极：OA<YA |
表2情绪效价作为工作记忆任务无关属性的研究
| 研究者 (年份) | 平均年龄 (或年龄范围) | 样本量 | 研究设计 | 研究结果(因变量：正确率) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YA vs. OA | YA vs. OA | 范式 | 刺激材料 | 效价 | 任务描述 | 组内分析结果 | 组间差异结果 | |
| Belham et al. Study1 | 21.38 vs. 71.10 | 56 vs. 39 | 延迟再认任务 | 图片 | 积极/中性/消极 | 记忆刺激的空间位置; 忽略刺激的情绪效价 | YA：积极=中性=消极 OA：积极=中性=消极 | 积极/中性/消极：OA<YA |
| Belham et al. Study2 | 21.31 vs. 69.92 | 26 vs. 25 | 延迟再认任务 | 面孔 | 高兴/中性/愤怒 | 记忆刺激的空间位置; 忽略刺激的情绪效价 | YA：愤怒>高兴; 高兴=中性; 愤怒=中性 OA：愤怒>高兴; 高兴=中性; 愤怒=中性 | 高兴/中性/愤怒：OA<YA |
| Berger et al. | 25.03 vs. 68.60 | 31 vs. 31 | 2-back | 面孔 | 中性/愤怒 | 比较当前与两个试次前的刺激的情绪效价是否一致; 忽略n-1与n-3试次的刺激 | YA：愤怒=中性; OA：愤怒=中性; | 愤怒、中性：OA<YA |
| Borg et al. | 27.07 vs. 78.35 vs. 80.92 (AD) | 14 vs. 14 vs.14 (AD) | 短时记忆任务 | 图片 | 中性/消极 | 记忆刺激的空间位置; 忽略刺激的情绪效价 | YA：消极=中性; OA：消极<中性; AD：消极=中性 | 消极：OA、AD<YA; OA=AD 中性：OA、AD<YA; OA>AD |
| Hartley et al. Study2 | 20.04 vs. 74.43 | 32 vs. 30 | 延迟匹配任务 | 面孔 | 情绪 | 记忆面孔身份; 忽略面孔的情绪效价 | - | 情绪：OA<YA |
| Hartley et al. Study3 | 20.38 vs. 75.41 | 24 vs. 24 | 延迟匹配任务 | 面孔 | 情绪/非情绪 | 记忆面孔身份; 忽略面孔的情绪效价 | - | 情绪/非情绪：OA<YA |
| Truong & Yang, | 19.69 vs.73.25 | 36 vs. 36 | 延迟匹配任务 | 词汇 | 积极/中性/消极 | 记忆任务指定的情绪目标刺激; 忽略任务指定的情绪分心刺激 | YA：积极=中性=消极 OA：消极<积极、中性; 积极=中性 | 积极、中性：OA=YA 消极：OA<YA |
参考文献 76
| [1] | 毕丹丹, 韩布新. (2014). 积极效应研究的几个方法学问题. 心理科学进展, 22(7),1103-1111. |
| [2] | 龚先旻, 王大华. (2012). 老年人情绪记忆中的积极效应及其产生机制. 心理科学进展, 20(9),1411-1418. |
| [3] | 霍丽娟, 郑志伟, 李瑾, 李娟. (2018). 老年人的脑可塑性:来自认知训练的证据. 心理科学进展, 26(5),846-858. |
| [4] | 刘海宁, 刘晓倩, 刘海虹, 李峰, 韩布新. (2019). 老年人情绪注意积极效应的发生机制. 心理科学进展, 27(12),2064-2076. |
| [5] | 喻婧, 马振玲, 牛亚南, 张宝山, Broster, L. S, 李娟. (2015). 年龄相关的情绪偏向效应的时间进程 (英文). 生物化学与生物物理进展, 42(2),365-374. |
| [6] | 张禹, 李红, 赵守盈, 罗禹. (2016). 任务无关情绪刺激对工作记忆信息更新的影响: 来自ERP的证据. 心理学报, 39(1),2-7. |
| [7] | Addis, D. R., Leclerc, C. M., Muscatell, K. A., & Kensinger, E. A. (2010). There are age-related changes in neural connectivity during the encoding of positive, but not negative, information. Cortex, 46(4),425-433. doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2009.04.011URLpmid: 19555933 |
| [8] | Barch, D. M., Braver, T. S., Sabb, F. W., & Noll, D. C. (2000). Anterior cingulate and the monitoring of response conflict: Evidence from an fMRI study of overt verb generation. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 12(2),298-309. URLpmid: 10771413 |
| [9] | Belham, F. S., Tavares, M.C. H., Satler, C., Garcia, A., Rodrigues, R. C., Canabarro, S.L. S., & Tomaz, C. (2017). Negative facial expressions - but not visual scenes - enhance human working memory in younger and older Participants. Frontiers in Pharmacology, 8,668. URLpmid: 29018342 |
| [10] | Berger, N., Richards, A., & Davelaar, E. J. (2018). Differential effects of angry faces on working memory updating in younger and older adults. Psychology and Aging, 33(4),667-673. URLpmid: 29902058 |
| [11] | Bermudez, T., & Souza, A. S. (2017). Can emotional content reduce the age gap in visual working memory? Evidence from two tasks. Cognition and Emotion, 31(8),1676-1683. URLpmid: 27702390 |
| [12] | Borg, C., Leroy, N., Favre, E., Laurent, B., & Thomas- Anterion, C. (2011). How emotional pictures influence visuospatial binding in short-term memory in ageing and Alzheimer's disease? Brain and Cognition, 76(1),20-25. URLpmid: 21481999 |
| [13] | Brockmole, J. R., & Logie, R. H. (2013). Age-related change in visual working memory: A study of 55, 753 participants aged 8-75. Frontiers in Psychology, 4,12. URLpmid: 23372556 |
| [14] | Carstensen, L. L., & DeLiema, M. (2018). The positivity effect: A negativity bias in youth fades with age. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 19,7-12. URLpmid: 30327789 |
| [15] | Carstensen, L. L., Isaacowitz, D. M., & Charles, S. T. (1999). Taking time seriously: A theory of socioemotional selectivity. American Psychologist, 54(3),165-181. |
| [16] | Carstensen, L. L., & Mikels, J. A. (2005). At the intersection of emotion and cognition: Aging and the Positivity. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14(3),117-121. |
| [17] | Clapp, W. C., & Gazzaley, A. (2012). Distinct mechanisms for the impact of distraction and interruption on working memory in aging. Neurobiology of Aging, 33(1),134-148. URLpmid: 20144492 |
| [18] | Coxon, J. P., Goble, D. J., Leunissen, I., van Impe, A., Wenderoth, N., & Swinnen, S. P. (2016). Functional brain activation associated with inhibitory control deficits in older adults. Cerebral Cortex, 26(1),12-22. URLpmid: 25085883 |
| [19] | Dolcos, F., Kragel, P., Wang, L., & McCarthy, G. (2006). Role of the inferior frontal cortex in coping with distracting emotions. Brain Imaging and Behavior, 17(15),1591-1594. |
| [20] | Dolcos, F., & McCarthy, G. (2006). Brain systems mediating cognitive interference by emotional distraction. The Journal of Neuroscience, 26(7),2072-2079. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5042-05.2006URLpmid: 16481440 |
| [21] | English, T., & Carstensen, L. L. (2015). Does positivity operate when the stakes are high? Health status and decision making among older adults. Psychology and Aging, 30(2),348-355. URLpmid: 25894484 |
| [22] | Feredoes, E., Heinen, K., Weiskopf, N., Ruff, C., & Driver, J. (2011). Causal evidence for frontal involvement in memory target maintenance by posterior brain areas during distracter interference of visual working memory. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108(42),17510-17515. |
| [23] | Ford, J. H., DiBiase, H. D., Ryu, E., & Kensinger, E. A. (2018). It gets better with time: Enhancement of age-related positivity effect in the six months following a highly negative public event. Psychology and Aging, 33(3),419-424. doi: 10.1037/pag0000250URLpmid: 29756799 |
| [24] | Gazzaley, A., Cooney, J. W., Rissman, J., & D'Esposito, M. (2005). Top-down suppression deficit underlies working memory impairment in normal aging. Nature Neuroscience, 8(10),1298-1300. |
| [25] | Giasson, H. L., Liao, H. -W., & Carstensen, L. L. (2019). Counting down while time flies: Implications of age-related time acceleration for goal pursuit across adulthood. Current Opinion in Psychology, 26,85-89. doi: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2018.07.001URLpmid: 30048830 |
| [26] | Gronchi, G., Righi, S., Pierguidi, L., Giovannelli, F., Murasecco, I., & Viggiano, M. P. (2018). Automatic and controlled attentional orienting in the elderly: A dual- process view of the positivity effect. Acta Psychologica, 185,229-234. URLpmid: 29550693 |
| [27] | Guye, S., & von Bastian, C. C. (2017). Working memory training in older adults: Bayesian evidence supporting the absence of transfer. Psychology and Aging, 32(8),732-746. URLpmid: 29239658 |
| [28] | Hartley, A. A., Ravich, Z., Stringer, S., & Wiley, K. (2015). An age-related dissociation of short-term memory for facial identity and facial emotional expression. The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, 70(5),718-728. |
| [29] | Hasher, L., Lustig, C., & Zacks, R. (2015). Inhibitory mechanisms and the control of attention. In A. R. A. Conway, C. Jarrold, M. J. Kane, A. Miyake & J. Towse (Eds.). Variation in working memory (pp.227-249). New York: Oxford University Press. |
| [30] | Iacoviello, B. M., Wu, G., Alvarez, E., Huryk, K., Collins, K. A. Murrough, J. W., ... Charney, D.S (2014). Cognitive- emotional training as an intervention for major depressive disorder. Depression and Anxiety, 31(8),699-706. |
| [31] | Iordan, A. D., & Dolcos, F. (2017). Brain activity and network interactions linked to valence-related differences in the impact of emotional distraction. Cerebral Cortex, 27(1),731-749. doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhv242URLpmid: 26543041 |
| [32] | Iordan, A. D., Dolcos, S., & Dolcos, F. (2013). Neural signatures of the response to emotional distraction: A review of evidence from brain imaging investigations. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7,200. URLpmid: 23761741 |
| [33] | Kalenzaga, S., Lamidey, V., Ergis, A.-M., Clarys, D., & Piolino, P. (2016). The positivity bias in aging: Motivation or degradation? Emotion, 16(5),602-610. URLpmid: 26950366 |
| [34] | Kanske, P., & Kotz, S. A. (2011). Emotion triggers executive attention: anterior cingulate cortex and amygdala responses to emotional words in a conflict task. Human Brain Mapping, 32(2),198-208. URLpmid: 20715084 |
| [35] | Labouvie-Vief, G., Grühn, D., & Studer, J. (2010). Dynamic integration of emotion and cognition: Equilibrium regulation in development and aging. In R. M. Lerner, M. E. Lamb and A. M. Freund (Eds.), The Handbook of Life-Span Development (Vol. 2, pp.79-115). John Wiley & Sons, Inc. |
| [36] | Lenartowicz, A., Verbruggen, F., Logan, G. D., & Poldrack, R. A. (2011). Inhibition-related activation in the right inferior frontal gyrus in the absence of inhibitory cues. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 23(11),3388-3399. URLpmid: 21452946 |
| [37] | Lugtmeijer, S., de Haan, E. H. F., & Kessels, R. P. C. (2019). A comparison of visual working memory and episodic memory performance in younger and older adults. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition,26(3),387-406. |
| [38] | Majerus, S., & D'Argembeau, A. (2011). Verbal short-term memory reflects the organization of long-term memory: Further evidence from short-term memory for emotional words. Journal of Memory and Language, 64(2),181-197. |
| [39] | Mammarella, N., Borella, E., Carretti, B., Leonardi, G., & Fairfield, B. (2013). Examining an emotion enhancement effect in working memory: Evidence from age-related differences. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 23(3),416-428. doi: 10.1080/09602011.2013.775065URLpmid: 23452136 |
| [40] | Mammarella, N., di Domenico, A., & Fairfield, B. (2016). Aging and the genetic road towards the positivity effect in memory. Experimental Gerontology, 82,120-124. doi: 10.1016/j.exger.2016.06.011URLpmid: 27350108 |
| [41] | Mather, M. (2016). The affective neuroscience of aging. Annual Review of Psychology, 67(1),213-238. |
| [42] | Mather, M., & Knight, M. R. (2006). Angry faces get noticed quickly: Threat detection is not impaired among older adults. The Journals of Gerontology. Series B, Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 61(1),54-57. doi: 10.1093/geronb/gbx048URLpmid: 28475695 |
| [43] | McNab, F., & Klingberg, T. (2008). Prefrontal cortex and basal ganglia control access to working memory. Nature Neuroscience, 11(1),103-107. URLpmid: 18066057 |
| [44] | McNab, F., Zeidman, P., Rutledge, R. B., Smittenaar, P., Brown, H. R., Adams, R. A., & Dolan, R. J. (2015). Age-related changes in working memory and the ability to ignore distraction. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(20),6515-6518. |
| [45] | Meng, X., Yang, J., Cai, A. Y., Ding, X. S., Liu, W., Li, H., & Yuan, J. J. (2015). The neural mechanisms underlying the aging-related enhancement of positive affects: Electrophysiological evidences. Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, 7,143. |
| [46] | Mikels, J. A., Larkin, G. R., Reuter-Lorenz, P. A., & Carstensen, L. L. (2005). Divergent trajectories in the aging mind: Changes in working memory for affective versus visual information with age. Psychology and Aging, 20(4),542-553. doi: 10.1037/0882-7974.20.4.542URLpmid: 16420130 |
| [47] | Mok, R. M., van der Meulen, J. E. H., Holmes, E. A., & Nobre, A. C. (2019). Changing interpretations of emotional expressions in working memory with aging. Emotion, 19(6),1060-1069. doi: 10.1037/emo0000481URLpmid: 30321038 |
| [48] | Niendam, T. A., Laird, A. R., Ray, K. L., Dean, Y. M., Glahn, D. C., & Carter, C. S. (2012). Meta-analytic evidence for a superordinate cognitive control network subserving diverse executive functions. Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Neuroscience, 12(2),241-268. |
| [49] | Oberauer, K. (2019). Working memory and attention - a conceptual analysis and review. Journal of Cognition, 2(1),36. |
| [50] | Oberauer, K., Farrell, S., Jarrold, C., & Lewandowsky, S. (2016). What limits working memory capacity? Psychological Bulletin, 142(7),758-799. doi: 10.1037/bul0000046URLpmid: 26950009 |
| [51] | Oren, N., Ash, E. L., Tarrasch, R., Hendler, T., Giladi, N., & Shapira-Lichter, I. (2017). Neural patterns underlying the effect of negative distractors on working memory in older adults. Neurobiology of Aging, 53,93-102. URLpmid: 28242539 |
| [52] | Peng, P., Barnes, M., Wang, C., Wang, W., Li, S., Swanson, H. L., ... Tao, S. (2018). A meta-analysis on the relation between reading and working memory. Psychological Bulletin, 144(1),48-76. URLpmid: 29083201 |
| [53] | Pessoa, L. (2008). On the relationship between emotion and cognition. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 9(2),148-158. doi: 10.1038/nrn2317URLpmid: 18209732 |
| [54] | Pessoa, L. (2009). How do emotion and motivation direct executive control? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 13(4),160-166. URLpmid: 19285913 |
| [55] | Pessoa, L. (2017). Cognitive control and emotional processing. In T. Egner (Ed.). The Wiley handbook of cognitive control,(pp.392-407). Chichster, United Kingdom: Wiley, Ltd. |
| [56] | Reed, A. E., & Carstensen, L. L. (2012). The theory behind the age-related positivity effect. Frontiers in Psychology, 3,339. |
| [57] | Rhodes, R. E., & Katz, B. (2017). Working memory plasticity and aging. Psychology and Aging, 32(1),51-59. URLpmid: 28182497 |
| [58] | Samrani, G., B?ckman, L., & Persson, J. (2017). Age- differences in the temporal properties of proactive interference in working memory. Psychology and Aging, 32(8),722-731. URLpmid: 29239657 |
| [59] | Sava, A. -A., Krolak-Salmon, P., Delphin-Combe, F., Cloarec, M., & Chainay, H. (2017). Memory for faces with emotional expressions in Alzheimer's disease and healthy older participants: Positivity effect is not only due to familiarity. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 24(1),1-28. |
| [60] | Schacht, A., & Sommer, W. (2009). Emotions in word and face processing: Early and late cortical responses. Brain and Cognition, 69(3),538-550. doi: 10.1016/j.bandc.2008.11.005URLpmid: 19097677 |
| [61] | Scheibe, S., & Carstensen, L. L. (2010). Emotional aging: Recent findings and future trends. The Journals of Gerontology. Series B, Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 65(2),135-144. |
| [62] | Schweizer, S., Grahn, J., Hampshire, A., Mobbs, D., & Dalgleish, T. (2013). Training the emotional brain: Improving affective control through emotional working memory training. The Journal of Neuroscience, 33(12),5301-5311. URLpmid: 23516294 |
| [63] | Schweizer, S., Hampshire, A., & Dalgleish, T. (2011). Extending brain-training to the affective domain: Increasing cognitive and affective executive control through emotional working memory training. PLOS ONE, 6(9),e24372. |
| [64] | Sims, T., Hogan, C. L., & Carstensen, L. L. (2015). Selectivity as an emotion regulation strategy: Lessons from older adults. Current Opinion in Psychology, 3,80-84. |
| [65] | Sv?rd, J., Fischer, H., & Lundqvist, D. (2014). Adult age-differences in subjective impression of emotional faces are reflected in emotion-related attention and memory tasks. Frontiers in Psychology, 5,423. URLpmid: 24860535 |
| [66] | Swanson, H. L., & Fung, W. (2016). Working memory components and problem-solving accuracy: Are there multiple pathways? Journal of Educational Psychology, 108(8),1153-1177. |
| [67] | Swick, D., Ashley, V., & Turken, A. U. (2008). Left inferior frontal gyrus is critical for response inhibition. BMC Neuroscience, 9,102. URLpmid: 18939997 |
| [68] | Teixeira-Santos, A. C., Moreira, C. S., Magalhaes, R., Magalhaes, C., Pereira, D. R., Leite, J., ... Sampaio, A. (2019). Reviewing working memory training gains in healthy older adults: A meta-analytic review of transfer for cognitive outcomes. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 103,163-177. URLpmid: 31100297 |
| [69] | Truong, L., & Yang, L. (2014). Friend or foe? Decoding the facilitative and disruptive effects of emotion on working memory in younger and older adults. Frontiers in Psychology, 5,94. URLpmid: 24624097 |
| [70] | Tsvetanov, K. A., Ye, Z., Hughes, L., Samu, D., Treder, M. S., Wolpe, N., ... Rowe, J. B. (2018). Activity and connectivity differences underlying inhibitory control across the adult life span. The Journal of Neuroscience, 38(36),7887-7900. URLpmid: 30049889 |
| [71] | Vermeij, A., Kessels, R.P. C., Heskamp, L., Simons, E.M. F., Dautzenberg, P.L. J., & Claassen, J. (2017). Prefrontal activation may predict working-memory training gain in normal aging and mild cognitive impairment. Brain Imaging and Behavior, 11(1),141-154. URLpmid: 26843001 |
| [72] | Walla, P., & Panksepp, J. (2013). Neuroimaging helps to clarify brain affective processing without necessarily clarifying emotions. In K. N. Fountas (Ed.), Novel Frontiers of Advanced Neuroimaging (pp.93-118). Rijeka, Croatia: In Tech. |
| [73] | Yuan, J. J., Tian, Y., Huang, X. T., Fan, H. Y., & Wei, X. M. (2019). Emotional bias varies with stimulus type, arousal and task setting: Meta-analytic evidences. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 107,461-472. URLpmid: 31557549 |
| [74] | Ziaei, M., Salami, A., & Persson, J. (2017). Age-related alterations in functional connectivity patterns during working memory encoding of emotional items. Neuropsychologia, 94,1-12. URLpmid: 27865969 |
| [75] | Ziaei, M., Samrani, G., & Persson, J. (2018). Age differences in the neural response to emotional distraction during working memory encoding. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 18(5),869-883. |
| [76] | Zinke, K., Zeintl, M., Eschen, A., Herzog, C., & Kliegel, M. (2012). Potentials and limits of plasticity induced by working memory training in old-old age. Gerontology, 58(1),79-87. doi: 10.1159/000324240URLpmid: 21430358 |
相关文章 15
| [1] | 张照, 张力为, 龚然. 视觉工作记忆的过滤效能[J]. 心理科学进展, 2021, 29(4): 635-651. |
| [2] | 关旭旭, 王红波. 抑制引起的遗忘及其神经机制[J]. 心理科学进展, 2021, 29(4): 665-676. |
| [3] | 黄挚靖, 李旭. 抑郁症患者工作记忆内情绪刺激加工的特点及其机制[J]. 心理科学进展, 2021, 29(2): 252-267. |
| [4] | 谢婷婷, 王丽娟, 王天泽. 肢体运动信息如何在工作记忆中存储?[J]. 心理科学进展, 2021, 29(1): 93-101. |
| [5] | 李婉如, 库逸轩. 急性应激影响工作记忆的生理心理机制[J]. 心理科学进展, 2020, 28(9): 1508-1524. |
| [6] | 冉光明, 李睿, 张琪. 高社交焦虑者识别动态情绪面孔的神经机制[J]. 心理科学进展, 2020, 28(12): 1979-1988. |
| [7] | 龙芳芳, 李昱辰, 陈晓宇, 李子媛, 梁腾飞, 刘强. 视觉工作记忆的巩固加工：时程、模式及机制[J]. 心理科学进展, 2019, 27(8): 1404-1416. |
| [8] | 刘海宁, 刘晓倩, 刘海虹, 李峰, 韩布新. 老年人情绪注意积极效应的发生机制[J]. 心理科学进展, 2019, 27(12): 2064-2076. |
| [9] | 郭丽月, 严超, 邓赐平. 数学能力的改善：针对工作记忆训练的元分析[J]. 心理科学进展, 2018, 26(9): 1576-1589. |
| [10] | 李杨卓, 杨旭成, 高虹, 高湘萍. 工作记忆表征对视觉注意的影响：基于非目标模板的视角[J]. 心理科学进展, 2018, 26(9): 1608-1616. |
| [11] | 滕静, 沈汪兵, 郝宁. 认知控制在发散性思维中的作用[J]. 心理科学进展, 2018, 26(3): 411-422. |
| [12] | 戴梦诺, 李艳菊, 杜峰. 多重注意定势的证据：来自空间瞬脱的结果[J]. 心理科学进展, 2017, 25(suppl.): 9-9. |
| [13] | 黄巧莉, 贾建荣, 罗欢. 工作记忆保持阶段记忆项目在人类大脑中倒序重演[J]. 心理科学进展, 2017, 25(suppl.): 62-62. |
| [14] | 师海宁, 王丽萍, 陈宏 . 基于Gabor的双重N-back工作记忆训练显著提高大学生视觉对比敏感度和流体智力[J]. 心理科学进展, 2017, 25(suppl.): 79-79. |
| [15] | 常欣, 白鹤, 王沛. 双语者语言切换代价的影响因素[J]. 心理科学进展, 2017, 25(9): 1469-1478. |
PDF全文下载地址:
http://journal.psych.ac.cn/xlkxjz/CN/article/downloadArticleFile.do?attachType=PDF&id=5409
