认知与发展心理学研究室知识库

摘要：“优势参照系地图“理论指出大脑中存在多种参照系(frame of reference, FOR)，如内在参照系（intrinsic FOR, IFOR）和自我参照系（ego-centric FOR, EFOR），它们相互竞争产生空间判断。但是，关于不同参照系之间的冲突的发生阶段（早期的注意分配阶段还是晚期的反应选择阶段）并不清楚；并且不同冲突在哪个阶段会产生相互影响也不清楚。为了探索第一个问题，我们采用了双大炮实验范式，并主要探索内在参照系之间的冲突（IFOR-IFOR，II）的发生阶段。双大炮实验范式首先呈现红色和蓝色的两个大炮和八个潜在目标点，随后一个点闪烁成为目标，要求被试转动与目标颜色相同的大炮，通过左右手按键以最短路径指向目标，记录被试的反应时和错误率。实验通过两个大炮夹角变量（0°、45°、90°、180°）调控两个大炮对应的不同内在参照系之间的空间一致性（早期注意分配相关）和反应一致性（晚期反应选择相关），分离出三种条件：空间一致反应一致，空间不一致反应一致，空间不一致反应不一致来确定II冲突的发生阶段。为了探索第二个问题，我们引入了自我参照系与内在参照系之间的冲突（EI），主要关注两种类型的冲突共同的发生阶段。结果发现，（1）观察到II冲突，表现为反应时和错误率在三种条件下依次增大；（2）观察到EI冲突，表现为反应时和错误率在冲突条件下的显著大于其在非冲突条件下。同时，EI冲突和II冲突发生交互作用，即EI冲突的反应时效应量在空间不一致反应不一致条件下显著大于其在空间一致反应一致条件和空间不一致反应一致两种条件下。以上结果表明：（1）II冲突受到空间一致性和反应一致性两个因素的共同影响，说明II冲突可能既发生在早期的注意分配阶段，又发生在晚期的反应选择阶段。（2）II和EI冲突的交互作用仅仅受到反应一致性的影响，说明两种冲突可能在晚期的反应选择阶段共享一个冲突加工过程。本研究将多重参照系的冲突加工过程分离成早期的注意分配过程和晚期的反应选择过程，进一步支持了参照系地图理论。

Abstract:“Frame of Reference-based Map of Salience” (FORMS) theory indicates that there are multiple frames of reference (FORs) in our brain, such as intrinsic FOR (IFOR) and egocentric FOR (EFOR), competing to underwrite our spatial judgments. However, the locus of these FOR-based conflicts (early attention allocation or late response selection phase) and how these conflicts interact in each phase remains unclear. To explore the first issue, we mainly focused on the IFOR-IFOR (II) conflict and adopted a modified two-cannon task, which could further manipulate the spatial congruency (attention allocation related) and response congruency (response selection related) of two IFORs (spatial congruent and response congruent (ScRc), spatial incongruent and response congruent (SiRc), and spatial incongruent and response incongruent (SiRi)) to locate the occurring phase of the II conflict. For the second issue, we introduced an EFOR-IFOR (EI) conflict and focused mainly on the interaction between II and EI conflicts to investigate the shared process phase of the two conflicts. The results showed that (1) II conflict increased response time (RT) and error rates (ER) increased in the three conditions (RT(ScRc) < RT(SiRc) < RT(SiRi)); and (2) the RT and ER were larger for EI conflict in the incongruent condition than in the congruent condition, and for the interaction between the II and EI conflicts, the effect size of EI conflict was significantly larger in the II response incongruent (SiRi) condition than in the ScRc and SiRc conditions. These results suggest that (1) II conflict is influenced by both spatial congruency and response congruency, which suggests that II conflict might occur in both the early attention allocation and late response selection phases; and (2) the interaction of EI and II conflicts is influenced by only the response congruency, which suggests that II and EI conflicts might share a conflict process in the late response selection phase. Our findings further support the FORMS theory by dissociation of two sub-processes of attention allocation and response selection.