基础心理学

预期与时间注意对视觉感知的影响

  • 付春野 ,
  • 吕勇
展开
  • 1. 教育部人文社会科学重点研究基地天津师范大学心理与行为研究院,天津师范大学心理学部,学生心理发展与学习天津市高校社会科学实验室,天津 300387
    2. 南开大学社会学院,天津 300350
吕 勇,E-mail:ly6312@163.com

收稿日期: 2021-11-29

  网络出版日期: 2024-05-13

基金资助

中央高校基本科研业务费(63232141)。

版权

《心理与行为研究》编辑部, 2024, 版权所有,未经授权,不得转载、摘编本刊文章,不得使用本刊的版式设计。

The Effect of Expectation and Temporal Attention on Visual Perception

  • Chunye FU ,
  • Yong LYU
Expand
  • 1. Key Research Base of Humanities and Social Sciences of the Ministry of Education, Academy of Psychology and Behavior, Faculty of Psychology, Tianjin Social Science Laboratory of Students’ Mental Development and Learning, Tianjin Normal University, Tianjin 300387
    2. School of Sociology, Nankai University, Tianjin 300350

Received date: 2021-11-29

  Online published: 2024-05-13

Copyright

, 2024, Copyright reserved © 2024.

摘要

使用注意瞬脱范式,通过2个实验探究时间注意与条件概率建立的预期如何互动性地作用于视觉感知。结果发现:当刺激处于注意瞬脱期时,与中性条件相比,符合预期刺激的视觉敏感性更高,且违反预期刺激的视觉敏感性更低;无论刺激是否处于注意瞬脱期,符合预期时的决策标准更低,违反预期时的主观可见性更高。研究结果为预测编码理论框架下预期与注意的协同作用模式提供了实证支持。

本文引用格式

付春野 , 吕勇 . 预期与时间注意对视觉感知的影响[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2024 , 22(1) : 15 -22 . DOI: 10.12139/j.1672-0628.2024.01.003

Abstract

Two experiments were undertaken to explore the interaction between temporal attention and expectations rooted in conditional probabilities concerning visual perception by using the attentional blink paradigm. The results showed that visual sensitivity was higher for expected stimuli whereas it was lower for unexpected stimuli when the stimuli were in the attentional blank phase compared to the neutral condition. Additionally, the decision criteria was lower for expected stimuli and the subjective visibility was higher for unexpected stimuli, regardless of whether the stimuli were in the blink phase or not. These findings provide support to a synergistic model of expectation and attention within the framework of predictive coding theory.

参考文献

周子暖, 陈颜璋, 傅世敏. 预期对注意的影响受制于被预期主体是目标还是分心物. 心理学报, 2022, 54 (3): 221- 235.
  Alef Ophir, E., Sherman, E., & Lamy, D. (2020). An attentional blink in the absence of spatial attention: A cost of awareness? Psychological Research, 84(4), 1039–1055.
  Alilovi?, J., Slagter, H. A., & van Gaal, S.. Subjective visibility report is facilitated by conscious predictions only. Consciousness and Cognition, 2021, 87, 103048.
  Bang, J. W., & Rahnev, D.. Stimulus expectation alters decision criterion but not sensory signal in perceptual decision making. Scientific Reports, 2017, 7 (1): 17072.
  Chun, M. M., & Potter, M. C.. A two-stage model for multiple target detection in rapid serial visual presentation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1995, 21 (1): 109- 127.
  Clark, A.. Whatever next? Predictive brains, situated agents, and the future of cognitive science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 2013, 36 (3): 181- 204.
  de Lange, F. P., Heilbron, M., & Kok, P. (2018). How do expectations shape perception? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 22(9), 764–779.
  Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A. G., & Buchner, A.. G*power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 2007, 39 (2): 175- 191.
  Feuerriegel, D., Vogels, R., & Kovács, G.. Evaluating the evidence for expectation suppression in the visual system. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 2021, 126, 368- 381.
  Friston, K.. A theory of cortical responses. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 2005, 360 (1456): 815- 836.
  Garc??a-Pérez, M. A.. Forced-choice staircases with fixed step sizes: Asymptotic and small-sample properties. Vision Research, 1998, 38 (12): 1861- 1881.
  Green, D. M., & Swets, J. A. (1966). Signal detection theory and psychophysics. New York: Wiley.
  Jabar, S. B., & Fougnie, D. (2022). How do expectations change behavior? Investigating the contributions at encoding versus decision-making. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 48(2), 226–241.
  Jiang, J. F., Summerfield, C., & Egner, T.. Attention sharpens the distinction between expected and unexpected percepts in the visual brain. The Journal of Neuroscience, 2013, 33 (47): 18438- 18447.
  Jolic?ur, P., Sessa, P., Dell’Acqua, R., & Robitaille, N.. Attentional control and capture in the attentional blink paradigm: Evidence from human electrophysiology. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 2006, 18 (4): 560- 578.
  Kok, P., Brouwer, G. J., van Gerven, M. A. J., & de Lange, F. P.. Prior expectations bias sensory representations in visual cortex. Journal of Neuroscience, 2013, 33 (41): 16275- 16284.
  Lamy, D., Carmel, T., & Peremen, Z.. Prior conscious experience enhances conscious perception but does not affect response priming. Cognition, 2017, 160, 62- 81.
  Meijs, E. L., Mostert, P., Slagter, H. A., de Lange, F. P., & van Gaal, S.. Exploring the role of expectations and stimulus relevance on stimulus-specific neural representations and conscious report. Neuroscience of Consciousness, 2019, (1): 11.
  Norman, D. A., & Bobrow, D. G.. On data-limited and resource-limited processes. Cognitive Psychology, 1975, 7 (1): 44- 64.
  Papera, M., & Richards, A.. Attentional gain and processing capacity limits predict the propensity to neglect unexpected visual stimuli. Psychophysiology, 2016, 53 (5): 634- 649.
  Raymond, J. E., Shapiro, K. L., & Arnell, K. M. (1992). Temporary suppression of visual processing in an RSVP task: An attentional blink? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18(3), 849–860.
  Richter, D., & de Lange, F. P.. Statistical learning attenuates visual activity only for attended stimuli. eLife, 2019, 8, e47869.
  Rungratsameetaweemana, N., Itthipuripat, S., Salazar, A., & Serences, J. T.. Expectations do not alter early sensory processing during perceptual decision-making. Journal of Neuroscience, 2018, 38 (24): 5632- 5648.
  Rungratsameetaweemana, N., & Serences, J. T.. Dissociating the impact of attention and expectation on early sensory processing. Current Opinion in Psychology, 2019, 29, 181- 186.
  Sherman, M. T., Seth, A. K., Barrett, A. B., & Kanai, R.. Prior expectations facilitate metacognition for perceptual decision. Consciousness and Cognition, 2015, 35, 53- 65.
  Smout, C. A., Garrido, M. I., & Mattingley, J. B.. Global effects of feature-based attention depend on surprise. NeuroImage, 2020, 215, 116785.
  Smout, C. A., Tang, M. F., Garrido, M. I., & Mattingley, J. B.. Attention promotes the neural encoding of prediction errors. PLoS Biology, 2019, 17 (2): e2006812.
  Summerfield, C., & Egner, T.. Expectation (and attention) in visual cognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2009, 13 (9): 403- 409.
  Summerfield, C., & Egner, T.. Feature-based attention and feature-based expectation. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2016, 20 (6): 401- 404.
  Summerfield, C., Egner, T., Mangels, J., & Hirsch, J.. Mistaking a house for a face: Neural correlates of misperception in healthy humans. Cerebral Cortex, 2006, 16 (4): 500- 508.
  Sun, M., Shang, C. Y., Jia, X., Liu, F., Cui, L. X., Wei, P., & Zhang, Q.. Expectation modulates the preferential processing of task-irrelevant fear in the attentional blink: Evidence from event-related potentials. Behavioral and Brain Functions, 2022, 18 (1): 16.
  Wang, F., & Maurer, U.. Interaction of top-down category-level expectation and bottom-up sensory input in early stages of visual-orthographic processing. Neuropsychologia, 2020, 137, 107299.
  Zuanazzi, A., & Noppeney, U.. The intricate interplay of spatial attention and expectation: A multisensory perspective. Multisensory Research, 2020, 33 (4?5): 383- 416.
Options
文章导航

/


版权所有 © 《心理与行为研究》编辑部
地址:天津市西青区宾水西道393号,天津师范大学106#邮箱 邮编:300387
电话:022-23540231, 23541213 E-mail:psybeh@126.com
本系统由北京玛格泰克科技发展有限公司设计开发