Abstract: There are two opposite views about attentional capture theory. One view is that attentional capture is not affected by the current task, but relies on significant extent of interference stimuli relative to the target stimuli. The attentional capture effect of shape interference stimuli is poor. Another view is that attentional capture is conditional capture. It is carried out under a top-down cognitive regulation. In addition, with regard to visual processing capacity and mechanisms of deaf people, researchers proposed “the change of visual attention resources allocation” hypothesis for deaf people. They thought that deaf people attempt to allocate more visual attentional resources to the margin of visual area in the processing of visual perception; however, the hearing-normal people tend to allocate more visual attentional resources to the central vision area. Introducing working memory load and view region variables, this study selected deaf and hearing-normal people, using eye tracker to investigate the attentional capture of shape interference stimuli on visual processing. It also compared the difference of deaf and hearing-normal people in visual processing and mechanism under the attentional capture experimental paradigm. This study used 2 (group) × 2 (working memory load) × 2 (shape distracter) × 3 (visual region) multi-factor mixed experiment design. Between-subject variable is category of subjects (deaf people, hearing-normal people), while within-subject variables are working memory load (high working memory load, low working memory load), shape distracter (shape distracter, no-shape distracter), visual region (1° viewing angle, 6° viewing angle, 11° viewing angle). The results showed that: (1) Although the shape distracter did not affect the cognitive performance of subjects’ visual processing, the subject's eye movement patterns was changed due to the change of working memory load. Under the condition of high work memory load, the number of fixation of shape distracter was higher than that of no-shape distracter; (2) The completion of subjects’ visual processing tasks was affected by the working memory load and visual region. The subjects’ eye movement patterns were different in different visual regions; (3) Deaf people had some disadvantages in visual processing in the high working memory load, but the attentional capture effects are the same for both deaf and hearing-normal people in the information processing of different visual regions and the shape of the interference. From the theories of attentional capture, this study suggests that the shape of the interference stimuli can capture attention when the cognitive control resources are decreased. Attentional capture was carried out under the top-down regulation of cognition. From visual processing capacity and mechanism of deaf people, this study suggests that under the attentional capture experimental paradigm, the information processing of margin visual area and central visual area of deaf people is the same as that of hearing-normal people. "Visual attention resource allocation change" hypothesis needs further verification. The innovations of this study are: (1) testified the theories of attentional capture; (2) compared the similarities and differences of visual processing capacity and mechanisms in deaf and hearing normal people.

Key words: deaf people, hearing-normal people, working memory load, shape distracter, visual region, attentional capture, eye movement study.

摘要： 通过记录和分析被试的行为和眼动指标，本研究试图探讨不同工作记忆负荷下，形状干扰对聋人与听力正常人不同视野位置上刺激信息捕获注意的异同。研究结果表明：（1）形状干扰刺激虽然没有影响被试视觉加工的认知绩效，但被试的眼动模式会由于工作记忆负荷的改变而改变，高工作记忆负荷时，有形状干扰的注视次数高于无形状干扰。（2）工作记忆负荷、视野位置影响被试视觉加工任务的完成，被试在不同视野位置的加工过程表现出不一致的眼动模式。（3）聋人视觉加工在高工作记忆负荷时存在一定的劣势，但其对不同视野位置的信息加工及形状干扰所产生的注意捕获效应与听力正常人一致。

关键词: 聋人,听力正常人,工作记忆负荷,形状干扰,视野位置,注意捕获,眼动研究.