双通道分配性注意对视听觉返回抑制的影响

删除或更新信息，请邮件至freekaoyan#163.com(#换成@)

本站小编 Free考研考试/2022-01-01

唐晓雨¹(

), 孙佳影¹, 彭姓²

¹ 辽宁师范大学心理学院; 辽宁省儿童青少年健康人格评定与培养协同创新中心, 大连 116029
² 中国民用航空飞行学院航空人因与工效学研究所, 四川广汉 418307

收稿日期:2019-08-08出版日期:2020-03-25发布日期:2020-01-18
通讯作者:唐晓雨E-mail:tangyu-2006@163.com

基金资助:* 国家自然科学基金项目资助(31600882)

The effect of bimodal divided attention on inhibition of return with audiovisual targets

TANG Xiaoyu¹(

), SUN Jiaying¹, PENG Xing²

¹ School of Psychology, Liaoning Collaborative Innovation Center of Children and Adolescents Healthy Personality Assessment and Cultivation, Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, China
² Institute of Aviation Human Factors and Ergonomics, Civil Aviation Flight University of China, Guanghan 618307, China

Received:2019-08-08Online:2020-03-25Published:2020-01-18
Contact:TANG Xiaoyu E-mail:tangyu-2006@163.com

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 本研究基于线索-靶子范式, 操纵目标刺激类型(视觉、听觉、视听觉)与线索有效性(有效线索、中性条件、无效线索)两个自变量, 通过3个实验来考察双通道分配性注意对视听觉返回抑制(inhibition of return, IOR)的影响。实验1 (听觉刺激呈现在左/右侧)结果发现, 在双通道分配性注意条件下, 视觉目标产生显著IOR效应, 而视听觉目标没有产生IOR效应; 实验2 (听觉刺激呈现在左/右侧)与实验3 (听觉刺激呈现在中央)结果发现, 在视觉通道选择性注意条件下, 视觉与视听觉目标均产生显著IOR效应但二者无显著差异。结果表明：双通道分配性注意减弱视听觉IOR效应。

图/表 7

图1实验1流程示意图注：图左为实验刺激呈现位置的示意图, 图右为单个试次的流程图。图右中视觉线索(白色方框)呈现在左侧, 目标(视听觉)也呈现在左侧(即, 有效线索位置), 要求被试对目标刺激进行既快又准的检测反应。其中, 目标刺激(V/A/AV)分别代表视觉(visual)、听觉(auditory)和视听觉(audiovisual)通道目标。ISI是指刺激间时间间隔(inter-stimulus interval)。ITI是指试次间的时间间隔(inter-trial interval)。

目标刺激类型	线索有效性	实验1		实验2		实验3
目标刺激类型	线索有效性	ACC (%)	RT (ms)	ACC (%)	RT (ms)	ACC (%)	RT (ms)
AV	有效线索	99 ± 1	449 ± 61	99 ± 1	418 ± 37	97 ± 5	425 ± 77
	无效线索	99 ± 1	446 ± 65	99 ± 1	401 ± 35	96 ± 6	408 ± 79
V	有效线索	97 ± 3	476 ± 63	98 ± 2	432 ± 37	95 ± 9	452 ± 81
	无效线索	97 ± 3	465 ± 70	99 ± 2	432 ± 36	95 ± 7	431 ± 80
A	有效线索	96 ± 2	498 ± 73	—	—	—	—
	无效线索	94 ± 4	519 ± 83	—	—	—	—

表1实验1~3不同条件下的正确率与反应时(M±SD)

目标刺激类型	线索有效性	实验1		实验2		实验3
目标刺激类型	线索有效性	ACC (%)	RT (ms)	ACC (%)	RT (ms)	ACC (%)	RT (ms)
AV	有效线索	99 ± 1	449 ± 61	99 ± 1	418 ± 37	97 ± 5	425 ± 77
	无效线索	99 ± 1	446 ± 65	99 ± 1	401 ± 35	96 ± 6	408 ± 79
V	有效线索	97 ± 3	476 ± 63	98 ± 2	432 ± 37	95 ± 9	452 ± 81
	无效线索	97 ± 3	465 ± 70	99 ± 2	432 ± 36	95 ± 7	431 ± 80
A	有效线索	96 ± 2	498 ± 73	—	—	—	—
	无效线索	94 ± 4	519 ± 83	—	—	—	—

图2实验1不同目标刺激类型和线索有效性下的平均反应时(*p < 0.05, ***p < 0.001)

图2实验1不同目标刺激类型和线索有效性下的平均反应时(*p < 0.05, ***p < 0.001)

表2实验1~3不同条件下CE、rMRE结果对比

实验	条件	M	95% CI		t	p
实验	条件	M	下限	上限	t	p
实验1
CE	V	10.83	1.15	20.52	2.27	0.029
	A	-21.29	-30.92	-11.66	-4.50	0.000
	AV	2.78	-6.27	11.84	0.62	0.538
CE对比	AV vs. V	-8.05	-14.83	-1.26	-2.41	0.022
rMRE	有效	4.08	2.90	5.27	7.01	0.000
	无效	2.38	0.88	3.87	3.24	0.003
rMRE对比	有效vs.无效	1.70	0.24	3.16	2.38	0.023
实验2
CE	V	9.47	0.68	18.26	2.20	0.036
	AV	17.25	7.14	27.35	3.49	0.002
CE对比	AV vs. V	7.78	-0.91	16.46	1.83	0.077
rMRE	有效	2.01	0.25	3.76	2.33	0.026
	无效	3.42	1.42	5.42	3.50	0.002
rMRE对比	有效vs.无效	-1.41	-3.51	0.68	-1.37	0.178
实验3
CE	V	20.35	5.62	35.08	2.80	0.008
	AV	17.02	4.18	29.86	2.68	0.011
CE对比	AV vs. V	-3.33	-13.94	7.27	-0.63	0.528
rMRE	有效	4.75	2.96	6.55	5.36	0.000
	无效	4.89	2.75	7.04	4.62	0.000
rMRE对比	有效vs.无效	-0.14	-2.25	1.97	-0.13	0.893

表2实验1~3不同条件下CE、rMRE结果对比

实验	条件	M	95% CI		t	p
实验	条件	M	下限	上限	t	p
实验1
CE	V	10.83	1.15	20.52	2.27	0.029
	A	-21.29	-30.92	-11.66	-4.50	0.000
	AV	2.78	-6.27	11.84	0.62	0.538
CE对比	AV vs. V	-8.05	-14.83	-1.26	-2.41	0.022
rMRE	有效	4.08	2.90	5.27	7.01	0.000
	无效	2.38	0.88	3.87	3.24	0.003
rMRE对比	有效vs.无效	1.70	0.24	3.16	2.38	0.023
实验2
CE	V	9.47	0.68	18.26	2.20	0.036
	AV	17.25	7.14	27.35	3.49	0.002
CE对比	AV vs. V	7.78	-0.91	16.46	1.83	0.077
rMRE	有效	2.01	0.25	3.76	2.33	0.026
	无效	3.42	1.42	5.42	3.50	0.002
rMRE对比	有效vs.无效	-1.41	-3.51	0.68	-1.37	0.178
实验3
CE	V	20.35	5.62	35.08	2.80	0.008
	AV	17.02	4.18	29.86	2.68	0.011
CE对比	AV vs. V	-3.33	-13.94	7.27	-0.63	0.528
rMRE	有效	4.75	2.96	6.55	5.36	0.000
	无效	4.89	2.75	7.04	4.62	0.000
rMRE对比	有效vs.无效	-0.14	-2.25	1.97	-0.13	0.893

图3实验1不同线索有效性下的rMRE 注：rMRE (相对多感觉反应增强; relative amount of multisensory response enhancement); *p < 0.05。

图4实验2不同条件下的平均反应时和rMRE 注：(a)不同目标刺激类型和线索有效性下的平均反应时(*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01)。(b)不同线索有效性下的rMRE (相对多感觉反应增强; relative amount of multisensory response enhancement)。

图5实验3不同条件下的平均反应时和rMRE 注：(a)不同目标刺激类型和线索有效性下的平均反应时(*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01)。(b)不同线索有效性下的rMRE (相对多感觉反应增强; relative amount of multisensory response enhancement)。

参考文献 39

[1]	Beck D. M., & Kastner S . (2009). Top-down and bottom-up mechanisms in biasing competition in the human brain. Vision Research, 49(10), 1154-1165.
[2]	Carrasco M . (2011). Visual attention: The past 25 years. Vision Research, 51(13), 1484-1525.
[3]	Chica A. B., Lupianez J., & Bartolomeo P . (2006). Dissociating inhibition of return from endogenous orienting of spatial attention: Evidence from detection and discrimination tasks. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 23(7), 1015-1034.
[4]	Eimer M., & Driver J . (2001). Crossmodal links in endogenous and exogenous spatial attention: Evidence from event-related brain potential studies. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Review, 25(6), 497-511.
[5]	Frassinetti F., Bolognini N., & Làdavas E . (2002). Enhancement of visual perception by crossmodal visuo-auditory interaction. Experimental Brain Research, 147(3), 332-343.
[6]	Gao Y., Li Q., Yang W., Yang J., Tang X., & Wu J . (2014). Effects of ipsilateral and bilateral auditory stimuli on audiovisual integration: A behavioral and event-related potential study. Neuroreport, 25(9), 668-675.
[7]	Klein R . (1988). Inhibitory tagging system facilitates visual search. Nature, 334(6181), 430-431.
[8]	Klein R. M . (2000). Inhibition of return. Trends in Cognitive Science, 4(4), 138-147.
[9]	Lupiáñez J., Milán E. G., Tornay F. J., Madrid E., & Tudela P . (1997). Does IOR occur in discrimination tasks? Yes, it does, but later. Perception & Psychophysics, 59(8), 1241-1254.
[10]	Lupiáñez J., Ruz M., Funes M. J., & Milliken B . (2007). The manifestation of attentional capture: Facilitation or IOR depending on task demands. Psychological Research, 71(1), 77-91.
[11]	Matusz P. J., & Eimer M . (2011). Multisensory enhancement of attentional capture in visual search. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18(5), 904-909.
[12]	Mcdonald J. J., & Ward L. M . (1999). Spatial relevance determines facilitatory and inhibitory effects of auditory covert spatial orienting. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 25(5), 1234-1252.
[13]	Meredith M. A., & Stein B. E . (1986). Visual, auditory, and somatosensory convergence on cells in superior colliculus results in multisensory integration. Journal of Neurophysiology, 56(3), 640-662.
[14]	Mishra J., Bavelier D., & Gazzaley A . (2012). How to assess gaming-induced benefits on attention and working memory. Games for Health Journal, 1(3), 192-198.
[15]	Mozolic J. L., Hugenschmidt C. E., Peiffer A. M., & Laurienti P. J . (2008). Modality-specific selective attention attenuates multisensory integration. Experimental Brain Research, 184(1), 39-52.
[16]	Peng X., Chang R S., Li Q., Wang A J., & Tang X Y . (2019). Visually induced inhibition of return affects the audiovisual integration under different SOA conditions. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 51(7), 759-771.
	[ 彭姓, 常若松, 李奇, 王爱君, 唐晓雨 . (2019). 不同SOA下视觉返回抑制对视听觉整合的调节作用. 心理学报, 51(7), 759-771.]
[17]	Posner M. I., & Cohen Y . (1984). Components of visual orienting. Attention and performance X: Control of Language Processes, 32, 531-556.
[18]	Posner M. I., Rafal R. D., Choate L. S., & Vaughan J . (1985). Inhibition of return: Neural basis and function. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 2(3), 211-228.
[19]	Pratt J., & Fischer M. H . (2002). Examining the role of the fixation cue in inhibition of return. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue Canadienne de Psychologie Expérimentale, 56(4), 294-301.
[20]	Pratt J., Kingstone A., & Khoe W . (1997). Inhibition of return in location- and identity-based choice decision tasks. Perception & Psychophysics, 59(6), 964-971.
[21]	Prime D. J., Tata M. S., & Ward L. M . (2003). Event-related potential evidence for attentional inhibition of return in audition. Neuroreport, 14(3), 393-397.
[22]	Reuter-Lorenz P. A., & Rosenquist J. N . (1996). Auditory cues and inhibition of return: The importance of oculomotor activation. Experimental Brain Research, 112(1), 119-126.
[23]	Roggeveen A. B., Prime D. J., & Ward L. M . (2005). Inhibition of return and response repetition within and between modalities. Experimental Brain Research, 167(1), 86-94.
[24]	Santangelo V., & Spence C . (2007). Multisensory cues capture spatial attention regardless of perceptual load. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 33(6), 1311-1321.
[25]	Satel J., Hilchey M. D., Wang Z. G., Story R., & Klein R. M . (2013). The effects of ignored versus foveated cues upon inhibition of return: An event-related potential study. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 75(1), 29-40.
[26]	Schmitt M., Postma A., & de Haan E . (2000). Interactions between exogenous auditory and visual spatial attention. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 53(1), 105-130.
[27]	Senkowski D., Saint-Amour D., Höfle M., & Foxe J. J . (2011). Multisensory interactions in early evoked brain activity follow the principle of inverse effectiveness. Neuroimage, 56(4), 2200-2208.
[28]	Slagter H. A., Prinssen S., Reteig L. C., & Mazaheri A . (2016). Facilitation and inhibition in attention: Functional dissociation of pre-stimulus alpha activity, P1, and N1 components. Neuroimage, 125(6), 25-35.
[29]	Spence C., & Driver J . (1998). Inhibition of return following an auditory cue. The role of central reorienting events. Experimental Brain Research, 118(3), 352-360.
[30]	Spence C., Lloyd D., Mcglone F., Nicholls M. E. R., & Driver J . (2000). Inhibition of return is supramodal: A demonstration between all possible pairings of vision, touch, and audition. Experimental Brain Research, 134(1), 42-48.
[31]	Talsma D., & Woldorff M. G . (2005). Selective attention and multisensory integration: Multiple phases of effects on the evoked brain activity. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17(7), 1098-1114.
[32]	Tang X., Gao Y., Yang W., Ren Y., Wu J., Ming Z., & Wu Q . (2019). Bimodal divided attention attenuates inhibition of return with audiovisual targets. Experimental Brain Research, 237(4), 1093-1107.
[33]	Tang X., Wu J., & Shen Y . (2016). The interactions of multisensory integration with endogenous and exogenous attention. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 61, 208-224.
[34]	van der Burg E., Olivers C. N. L., Bronkhorst A. W., & Theeuwes J . (2008). Pip and pop: Nonspatial auditory signals improve spatial visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 34(5), 1053-1065.
[35]	van der Burg E., Talsma D., Olivers C. N., Hickey C., & Theeuwes J . (2011). Early multisensory interactions affect the competition among multiple visual objects. Neuroimage, 55(3), 1208-1218.
[36]	van der Stoep N., van der Stigchel S., & Nijboer T. C. W . (2015). Exogenous spatial attention decreases audiovisual integration. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 77(2), 464-482.
[37]	van der Stoep N., van der Stigchel S., Nijboer T. C. W., & Spence C . (2016). Visually induced inhibition of return affects the integration of auditory and visual information. Perception, 46(1), 6-17.
[38]	Wu J., Yang J., Yu Y., Li Q., Nakamura N., Shen Y., … Abe K . (2012). Delayed audiovisual integration of patients with mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease compared with normal aged controls. Journal of Alzheimers Disease Jad, 32(2), 317-328.
[39]	Zhang M., Tang X., & Wu J . (2013). Blocking the link between stimulus and response at previously attended locations: Evidence for inhibitory tagging mechanism. Neuroscience and Biomedical Engineering, 1(1), 13-21.