任务定势对自动语义激活过程调节作用的ERP研究

心理科学 ›› 2012, Vol. 35 ›› Issue (1): 30-37.

任务定势对自动语义激活过程调节作用的ERP研究

宋娟¹,吕勇²

1. 天津师范大学
2. 天津师范大学心理与行为研究院

收稿日期:2010-09-06 修回日期:2011-05-13 出版日期:2012-01-20 发布日期:2012-01-20
通讯作者: 吕勇
基金资助:
教育部人文社会科学重点研究基地重大项目《流动儿童社会处境、心理发展状况及需求的研究》;国家自然科学基金“十一五”规划（教育科学）2006年重点课题;教育部百篇优秀博士论文作者专项资金项目

Task-set Effect on Automatic Semantic Activation: An ERPs Study

Song Juan,

Received:2010-09-06 Revised:2011-05-13 Online:2012-01-20 Published:2012-01-20

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

摘要：本研究致力于探讨自上而下的因素对自动加工的影响。选取的自上而下因素为任务定势，自动加工过程为自动语义激活过程。研究采用ERPs技术，中文词汇为刺激，利用掩蔽启动范式，采用反应时和N400为指标。实验任务有三个：对问号后出现的词进行生物/非生物的词汇分类判断；对圆圈后出现的词进行是否含上下结构的字的词汇结构判断；对带“*”的词进行真词/假词判断。研究发现先前完成的任务形成的任务定势会对随后的自动语义激活过程产生调节作用：在词汇分类判断任务后，掩蔽启动刺激对靶刺激产生启动效应。在词汇结构判断任务后，掩蔽启动刺激对靶刺激没产生显著的启动效应。

关键词: 任务定势, 自上而下的调节, 自动加工, 自动语义激活, 事件相关电位

Abstract:

Abstract: The study mainly concerned whether the top-down task factors could modulate automatic semantic activation using masked priming paradigm, Chinese two –character words stimuli and ERPs technique. The top-down task factors was task-set. The idexes were RT and N400. There were three kinds of tasks: subjects were asked to perform categorization task or structure decision task of the prime which separately had a “?” or a circle on it and to perform lexical decision task with the words that had a star symbol on it, which is the targets. The results showed that top-down task-set could modulate automatic semantic activation: After semantic categorization task the priming effect of masked primes on targets took place; After structure decision task the priming effect of masked primes on targets did not happen.

Key words: task-set, top-down modulation, automatic processing, automatic semantic activation, event-related potentials （ERPs）

宋娟吕勇. 任务定势对自动语义激活过程调节作用的ERP研究[J]. 心理科学, 2012, 35(1): 30-37.

Song Juan. Task-set Effect on Automatic Semantic Activation: An ERPs Study[J]. Psychological Science, 2012, 35(1): 30-37.

参考文献

Deacon, D., Hewitt, S., Chien-Ming, Y., Nagata, M. (2000). Event-related potential indices of semantic priming using masked and unmasked words: evidence that the N400 does not reflect a post-lexical process, Cognitive Brain Research, 9, 137-146. Gilbert, C. D., Sigman, M. (2007). Brain states: Top-down influences in sensory processing. Neuron, 54, 677-696. Kahan, T. A. (2000). Negative priming from masked words: Retrospective prime clarification or center-surround inhibition? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26(6), 1392-1410. Kiefer, M. (2002). The N400 is modulated by unconsciously perceived masked words: further evidence for an automatic spreading activation account of N400 priming effects. Cognitive Brain Research, 13, 27-39. Kiefer, M. (2006). Top-down Modulation automatischer Prozesse durch Aufgabeneinstellungen [Top down modulation of automatic processes by task sets]. Paper presented at the Teap, Meinz, Germany. Kiefer, M., Brendel, D. (2006). Attentional modulation of unconscious ‘automatic’ processes: Evidence from event-related potentials in a masked priming paradigm. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 18, 184-198. Luck, S. J., Vogel, E. K., Shapiro, K.L. (1996). Word meanings can be accessed but not reported during the attentional blink. Nature, 383, 616–618. Mari-Beffa, P., Valdes, B., Cullen, D. J. D. et al. (2005). ERP analyses of task effects on semantic processing from words. Cognitive Brain Research, 23, 293-305. Miller, B. T., D’ Esposito, M. (2005). Searching for “the Top” in top-down control. Neuron, 48, 535-538. Posner, M. I., Snyder, C. R. R. (1975). Attention and cognitive control. In R. L. Solso (Ed.), Information processing and cognition: The Loyola Symposium (pp. 55-85). HillSDale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Rolke, B., Heil, M., Streb, J., Henninghausen, E. (2001). Missed prime words within the attentional blink evoke an N400 semantic priming effect. Psychophysiology, 38, 165-174. Schneider, W., Shiffrin, R. M. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: Detection, search, and attention. Psychological Review, 84, 1-66. Smith, J. E. K. (1982). Simple algorithms for M-alternative forced-choice calculations. Perception and Psychophysics, 31(1), 95-96. Sui, J., Zhu, Y., Han, S. H. (2006). Self-face recognition in attended and unattended conditions: an event-related brain potential study. Neuroreport: Cognitive Neuroscience and Neuropsychology, 17(4), 423-427. Taft, M., Zhu, X. P. (1999). Positional Specificity of Radicals in Chinese Character Recognition. Journal of Memory and Language, 40, 498-519. Verleger, R., Ja?kowski, P., Aydemir, A., Van der Lubbe, R. H. J., Groen, M. (2004). Qualitative differences between conscious and non-conscious processing? On negative and positive priming effects induced by masked arrows. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 494-515. Wager, T. D., Jonides, J., Reading, S. (2004). Neuroimaging studies of shifting attention: a meta-analysis. NeuroImage, 22, 1679-1693. Liu, W. (2004). An experiment study of semantic transparency in the processing of compounds. Unpublished Doctorial Dissertation. Beijing Language and Culture University. [刘伟. (2004). 语义透明度对留学生双音节合成词词汇通达的影响. 博士学位论文. 北京语言大学.]

[1]	林谷洋孟迎芳林惠茹. 注意促进效应的ERP研究[J]. , 2020, (1): 9-16.
[2]	张忠炉邢强雷怡李红. 顿悟式组块破解的时间进程：ERP研究[J]. , 2019, (5): 1026-1032.
[3]	吴盈郭小涛陈香王正雪高雅王晓冬. /n/-/l/音位合并现象的神经机制：来自MMN的证据[J]. , 2019, (2): 273-279.
[4]	游园园邓欣媚赛李阳. 儿童与成人对社会和非社会正性情绪刺激脑电反应特征比较[J]. , 2019, (2): 313-321.
[5]	李阳萍齐森青李欣颐张晥李亚丹陈熙彤侯雪珍胡卫平. 参考选择影响情绪加工相关的ERPs[J]. 心理科学, 2018, (6): 1310-1317.
[6]	黄颀刘电芝张剑心卢凤. 内隐序列学习与中央执行功能的关系[J]. 心理科学, 2018, (6): 1366-1373.
[7]	杨玲苏红婷曹华张建勋姚东伟张炀. 海洛因戒断者的阈下情绪启动研究[J]. 心理科学, 2018, (5): 1247-1253.
[8]	王宇超周玲玲杨群. 三领域厌恶情绪的时程加工模式：攻击性个体差异的视角[J]. 心理科学, 2018, (2): 264-271.
[9]	聂衍刚梁梓勤窦凯王瑞琪. 青少年反应性攻击和结果评价的ERPs研究：基于自我控制资源的视角[J]. 心理科学, 2018, (1): 77-84.
[10]	王博韬段海军唐雪梅张睆胡卫平. 新颖性图像加工的时间进程[J]. 心理科学, 2016, 39(6): 1333-1338.
[11]	丁道群张湘一陈锡友. 不同注意资源水平上核心厌恶和道德厌恶刺激加工分离效应的ERPs研究[J]. 心理科学, 2016, 39(2): 265-271.
[12]	王敬欣王春梅谢芳常敏张阔. 负性情绪调节中认知重评和分心策略的作用：ERPs研究[J]. 心理科学, 2015, (5): 1039-1044.
[13]	Xinmei Deng 丁雪辰桑标. 晚期正成分的时间-空间迁移模式在情绪调节发展研究中的应用[J]. 心理科学, 2015, (4): 853-860.
[14]	张小将刘迎杰刘昌. 面孔审美加工的神经机制及个体差异[J]. 心理科学, 2015, (3): 574-579.
[15]	刘耀中窦凯. 人际控制感对合作行为的影响：一项囚徒困境的ERPs研究[J]. 心理科学, 2015, (3): 643-650.