言语与空间任务指令对数字-空间联结编码的影响

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 以1～9除5外的阿拉伯数字和汉字标签“左”“右”为实验材料，采用数字奇偶判断任务，探讨任务指令对数字-空间联结编码的影响。结果发现：言语任务指令条件下，词语一致性与物理一致性的交互作用显著，且词语一致和不一致时均未发现空间-数字联合反应编码效应（SNARC），表明言语-空间编码在数字-空间联结中更有优势；空间任务指令条件下，物理一致性主效应显著，且词语一致和不一致时均出现了SNARC效应，表明视觉空间编码更有优势。说明数字-空间联结编码受实验任务指令的影响，被试会根据任务指令设置的情景选择视觉空间编码或言语-空间编码对数字进行空间联结。

关键词: 视觉空间编码, 言语-空间编码, 任务指令, 数字-空间联结, SNARC效应

Abstract: The present study adopted parity judgment task with Arabic digits 1 to 9 (expect 5) and Chinese characters (e.g., “左” and “右”) as experimental materials to explore the effect of task instructions on the coding of number-space interactions. The results showed that the interaction between word congruence and physical congruence was significant in the verbal task instruction. In addition, neither of the word consistency nor inconsistency triggered the SNARC effect, indicating that verbal-spatial coding is more advantageous. But in the spatial task instruction, there was a main effect of physical consistency, and SNARC effect was shown in both word consistent and word inconsistent conditions, indicating that visual spatial coding is more advantageous. Taken together, whether participants used visual spatial coding or verbal-spatial coding to associate numbers with space depending on task instructions, showing the effect of task instructions on number-space interactions.

Key words: visual spatial coding, verbal-spatial coding, task instruction, number-space interactions, SNARC effect

中图分类号:

B842

潘运, 赵竹君, 戴隆农. 言语与空间任务指令对数字-空间联结编码的影响[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2020, 18(6): 734-740.

PAN Yun, ZHAO Zhujun, DAI Longnong. The Effect of Verbal and Spatial Task Instructions on the Coding of Number-Space Interactions[J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2020, 18(6): 734-740.

参考文献

潘运, 王馨, 黄玉婷, 赵守盈. (2013). 数字-空间联结SNARC效应的编码: 视觉空间和言语空间. 心理学探新, 33(6), 500-506, doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-5184.2013.06.004
Aleotti, S., Di Girolamo, F., Massaccesi, S., & Priftis, K. (2020). Numbers around descartes: A preregistered study on the three-dimensional SNARC effect. Cognition, 195, 104111, doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2019.104111.
Bächtold, D., Baumüller, M., & Brugger, P. (1998). Stimulus-response compatibility in representational space. Neuropsychologia, 36(8), 731-735, doi: 10.1016/s0028-3932(98)00002-5.
Dehaene, S., Bossini, S., & Giraux, P. (1993). The mental representation of parity and number magnitude. Journal of Experimental Psychology General, 122(3), 371-396, doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.122.3.371.
Fischer, M. H. (2006). The future for SNARC could be stark… Cortex, 42(8), 1066-1068, doi: 10.1016/S0010-9452(08)70218-1.
Fischer, M. H., Castel, A. D., Dodd, M. D., & Pratt, J. (2003). Perceiving numbers causes spatial shifts of attention. Nature Neuroscience, 6(6), 555-556, doi: 10.1038/nn1066.
Fischer, U., Moeller, K., Class, F., Huber, S., Cress, U., & Nuerk, H. C. (2016). Dancing with the SNARC: Measuring spatial-numerical associations on a digital dance mat. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 70(4), 306-315, doi: 10.1037/cep0000084.
Galfano, G., Rusconi, E., & Umiltà, C. (2006). Number magnitude orients attention, but not against one’s will. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 13(5), 869-874, doi: 10.3758/BF03194011.
Georges, C., Schiltz, C., & Hoffmann, D. (2015). Task instructions determine the visuospatial and verbal-spatial nature of number-space associations. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 68(9), 1895-1909, doi: 10.1080/17470218.2014.997764.
Gevers, W., Santens, S., Dhooge, E., Chen, Q., van den Bossche, L., Fias, W., & Verguts, T. (2010). Verbal-spatial and visuospatial coding of number-space interactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 139(1), 180-190, doi: 10.1037/a0017688.
Gevers, W., Verguts, T., Reynvoet, B., Caessens, B., & Fias, W. (2006). Numbers and space: A computational model of the SNARC effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32(1), 32-44, doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.32.1.32.
Gibson, L. C., & Maurer, D. (2016). Development of SNARC and distance effects and their relation to mathematical and visuospatial abilities. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 150, 301-313, doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2016.05.009.
Ginsburg, V., van Dijck, J. P., Previtali, P., Fias, W., & Gevers, W. (2014). The impact of verbal working memory on number-space associations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 40(4), 976-986, doi: 10.1037/a0036378.
Göbel, S. M., Shaki, S., & Fischer, M. H. (2011). The cultural number line: A review of cultural and linguistic influences on the development of number processing. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 42(4), 543-565, doi: 10.1177/0022022111406251.
Guida, A., Megreya, M. A., Lavielle-Guida, M., Noël, Y., Mathy, F., van Dijck, J. P., & Abrahamse, E. (2018). Spatialization in working memory is related to literacy and reading direction: Culture “literarily” directs our thoughts. Cognition, 175, 96-100, doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2018.02.013.
Herrera, A., Macizo, P., & Semenza, C. (2008). The role of working memory in the association between number magnitude and space. Acta Psychologica, 128(2), 225-237, doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2008.01.002.
Imbo, I., De Brauwer, J., Fias, W., & Gevers, W. (2012). The development of the SNARC effect: Evidence for early verbal coding. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 111(4), 671-680, doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2011.09.002.
Jonas, C. N., Spiller, M. J., Jansari, A., & Ward, J. (2014). Comparing implicit and synaesthetic number-space associations: Visuospatial and verbal spatial-numerical associations of response codes. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67(7), 1262-1273, doi: 10.1080/17470218.2013.856928.
Lorch, R. F., & Myers, J. L. (1990). Regression analyses of repeated measures data in cognitive research. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16(1), 149-157, doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.16.1.149.
Morano, S., Riccomini, P. J., & Lee, J. Y. (2019). Accuracy of area model and number line representations of fractions for students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 34(3), 133-143, doi: 10.1111/ldrp.12197.
Proctor, R. W., & Cho, Y. S. (2006). Polarity correspondence: A general principle for performance of speeded binary classification tasks. Psychological Bulletin, 132(3), 416-442, doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.132.3.416.
Ristic, J., Wright, A., & Kingstone, A. (2007). Attentional control and reflexive orienting to gaze and arrow cues. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 14(5), 964-969, doi: 10.3758/BF03194129.
Rugani, R. Vallortigara, G., Priftis, K., & Regolin, L. (2015). Number-space mapping in the newborn chick resembles humans’ mental number line. Science, 347(6221), 534-536, doi: 10.1126/science.aaa1379.
Santens, S., & Gevers, W. (2008). The SNARC effect does not imply a mental number line. Cognition, 108(1), 263-270, doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2008.01.002.
Shaki, S., & Fischer, M. H. (2014). Random walks on the mental number line. Experimental Brain Research, 232(1), 43-49, doi: 10.1007/s00221-013-3718-7.
Shaki, S., Fischer, M. H., & Petrusic, W. M. (2009). Reading habits for both words and numbers contribute to the SNARC effect. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 16(2), 328-331, doi: 10.3758/pbr.16.2.328.
Shaki, S., & Gevers, W. (2011). Cultural characteristics dissociate magnitude and ordinal information processing. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 42(4), 639-650, doi: 10.1177/0022022111406100.
van Dijck, J. P., Gevers, W., & Fias, W. (2009). Numbers are associated with different types of spatial information depending on the task. Cognition, 113(2), 248-253, doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2009.08.005.
van Dijck, J. P., Gevers, W., Lafosse, C., & Fias, W. (2012). The heterogeneous nature of number-space interactions. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 5, 182, doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2011.00182.
Zohar-Shai, B., Tzelgov, J., Karni, A., & Rubinsten, O. (2017). It does exist! A left-to-right spatial-numerical association of response codes (SNARC) effect among native Hebrew speakers. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 43(4), 719-728, doi: 10.1037/xhp0000336.
Zorzi, M., Priftis, K., & Umiltà, C. (2002). Neglect disrupts the mental number line. Nature, 417(6885), 138-139, doi: 10.1038/417138a.

[1]	潘运, 杨阳, 邹昌浪, 陈衍, 龙女. 基于主体和客体的空间参照框架对数字-空间联结的影响[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2019, 17(5): 613-619.
[2]	李雅君, 刘阳, 闻素霞. 书写习惯对数字空间表征SNARC效应的影响[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2018, 16(5): 618-623.
[3]	金桂春, 王有智, 王丽. Simon效应对空间-数字反应编码联合效应的抑制作用^*[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2017, 15(4): 489-494.
[4]	金桂春,王强强,王有智,吴彦文. 数字SNARC效应中大小和顺序信息的分离^*[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2016, 14(2): 228-233.
[5]	吴彦文, 杨龙. 计数单位的空间联合编码效应[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2013, 11(4): 440-443.
[6]	孔风；赵晶晶；游旭群；张宇. 听觉通道下负数的低水平加工引起注意的SNARC效应[J]. , 2012, 10(1): 12-17.
[7]	潘运；沈德立；王杰3. 不同注意提示线索条件下汉字数字加工的SNARC效应[J]. , 2009, 7(1): 21-26.