认知与发展心理学研究室知识库

暗示性动作是指个体在观看静止躯体图片时知觉到的动作信息。研究发现暗示性动作作为一种具有生物属性的线索能够快速诱发观察者空间注意转移。但目前尚不清楚暗示性动作诱发观察者空间注意转移是否具有可重复性、产生的原因，以及暗示性动作是以自动的还是自主控制的方式诱发观察者空间注意转移。本研究采用经典的中央线索提示范式，通过 4个研究 8个实验系统考察上述三个科学问题，探讨暗示性动作诱发观察者空间注意转移的认知神经机制。
研究一通过排除目标刺激突现的行为实验以及借助事件相关电位技术考察了暗示性动作诱发观察者空间注意转移的可重复性和原因。研究二基于 “预期性”标准，采集20-70岁健康成年人和20-60岁精神分裂症患者在预期性任务（72% 反向预期和100% 预期）上的表现，探讨暗示性动作以何种方式诱发观察者空间注意转移。研究三基于“认知负荷”标准，采用双任务范式，考察言语和视觉空间工作记忆负荷任务对暗示性动作诱发注意转移效应的影响，进一步探讨暗示性动作诱发空间注意转移的方式。研究四借助事件相关电位技术考察训练学习对暗示性动作诱发观察者注意转移方式的影响，并进一步探究暗示性动作和箭头线索诱发注意转移在神经机制上的异同。上述研究主要得到以下结果：
1)  暗示性动作线索（扔和跑）相比于站立线索不仅诱发前部注意指向负波（300-500ms），且在行为反应时上出现线索提示性效应，该效应不受干扰目标的影响，表明暗示性动作确实能够诱发观察者空间注意转移，但仅仅躯干朝向却不足以诱发空间注意转移。
2)  暗示性动作线索（扔和跑）相比于站立线索诱发了一个溯源定位在视觉运动皮层区（具体位于内侧颞叶皮层区域）的更大 P2（170-260ms）成分，该成分的出现表明视觉运动皮层区的暗示性运动信号知觉加工在暗示性动作诱发注意转移中起重要作用。
3)  检测“预期性”标准的实验发现，老年人和精神分裂症患者的自主控制能力受损。老年人（61-70岁）在100% 跑线索反向预期任务中的“获益”效应低于健康年轻人（20-30岁） ；精神分裂症患者（20-60岁）在100%  跑线索朝向预期任务中的“获益”效应低于健康控制组（20-60岁）；此外，健康年轻人（20-30岁）在72%反向预期任务中的暗示性动作（扔和跑）线索提示性效应消失。检测“认知负荷”标准的实验发现，言语和视觉工作记忆负荷任务增大了暗示性动作（扔和跑）线索提示性效应。上述结果表明，暗示性动作主要以自主控制的方式诱发观察者注意转移。
4）训练学习使得暗示性扔动作线索诱发的前部注意指向负波（200-450ms）出现提前，且诱发了晚期注意指向正波（450-550ms），表明训练学习使得暗示性动作诱发注意转移的方式表现出自动化特征。此外，过度训练学习的箭头线索诱发了早期注意指向负波（100-400ms）和晚期注意指向正波（450-550ms），表明箭头线索以一种更为自动的方式诱发观察者注意转移，支持“自动化的符号性注意转移”观点。
上述发现不仅有助于深化对暗示性动作诱发观察者空间注意转移机制的理解，进一步丰富“注意朝向检测器”假说，也对改善个体因年老化或精神分裂症带来的认知功能衰退具有指导作用。

 Implied action is defined as extraction of action information from a stationary photo. Implied action cues, as biological relevant  stimuli, could shift the observer’s spatial attention quickly. However, until now, the temporal sequential psychological processes that are involved in attentional shift of implied action cues and what might facilitate attentional shifts that are induced by implied action cues remains unclear. Furthermore, whether implied action cues induce spatial attention in an automatic or voluntary control manner remains unknown. By adopting the typical central cueing paradigm, with 4 studies including 8 experiments, we address these three scientific issues to enlighten the cognitive and neural mechanisms of attention orienting which is triggered by implied action cue.
By capitalizing on ERP method, as well as behavior experiment of eliminating abrupt onset of  a  target,  study 1 explored the temporal sequential psychological processes and the facilitation factor that contribute to attentional shifts  which  are triggered by implied action cues. Based on the “intentionality criterion” (72% counter-predictive and 100% predictive tasks), the study 2 investigated whether the implied action cues induce spatial attention in an automatic or voluntary control manner by measuring the behavioral responses in 20-70 healthy adults and 20-60 patients with schizophrenia. Based on the “cognitive load criterion”, with dual task paradigm, the study 3 further explored the automatic or voluntary control of attentional orienting by examining the role of verbal and visual working memory tasks on the attentional shifts which  are  triggered by implied action cues. By capitalizing the ERP method,  the  study 4 tested the hypothesis that over-learned association mechanisms play a key role in the automatic-like orienting of attention induced by implied action cues and arrow cues. The results indicated that: (1) Contrast to the standing cue，implied action cues (throwing and running) not only elicited  the anterior directing attention negativity  (300-500ms), but also produced cueing validity effect which is not influenced by the interfering  target, indicating that implied action cues, rather than trunk orientation alone, could shift the observer’s attention.
(2) Compared with the standing cue, implied action cues (throwing and running) elicited a larger P2 component which is source localized at the visual motion cortex, e.g., medial  temporal cortex (hMT+), indicating that implied motion perception stemmed  from visual motion cortex might play an important role in facilitating the attentional shifts which are induced by implied action cues.
(3) The experiments of testing the  “intentionality criterion”  found that since voluntary controlled  attentional processes have  compromised  due to ageing and schizophrenia, the  “benefit” magnitude  of 100%  counter-predictive running  cueing task are declined in aged adults (60-70 years), and the “benefit” magnitude of 100% predictive running  cueing task are also decreased in patients with  schizophrenia (20-60 years).  In addition, the throwing and  running  cueing validity effects of 72% counter-predictive task in younger adults (20-30 years) are disappeared. Furthermore, the experiments of testing the “cognitive load criterion” found  that  the  throwing and running cueing validity effects were increased when the central cueing task disrupted by  either  the verbal or  visual-spatial working memory task. These results indicated that implied action cues predominantly induce the observer’s attention in a voluntary
fashion.  
  (4) Overtraining implied action cue (throwing) elicited earlier anterior directing attention negativity (200-450ms)  and the  late attention-directing positivity (450-550ms),  in some extent,  indicating that implied action cue  induces  attention orienting in a relatively automatic-like orienting of attention. Over-learned arrow cues elicited  the  early directing attention negativity (100-400ms)  and the  late attention-directing positivity (450-550ms), reflecting  that  arrow cues  induce a relatively automatic-like orienting of attention, supporting the  view of  “automated symbolic orienting”.
These findings not only contribute to shed light on cognitive and neural mechanisms associated with attention orienting which is triggered by implied action cues  and  extended  the view of “direction of attention detector”,  but also have significant cognitive training application to improving the cognitive function of individuals due to aging or schizophrenia.