定向遗忘的认知加工机制研究
文献类型：学位论文
| 作者 | 滑慧敏 |
| 答辩日期 | 2023-06 |
| 文献子类 | 博士 |
| 授予单位 | 中国科学院大学 |
| 授予地点 | 中国科学院心理研究所 |
| 其他责任者 | 杜峰 |
| 关键词 | 定向遗忘 自然遗忘 自动激活 抑制失败 抑制的反弹 |
| 学位名称 | 理学博士 |
| 学位专业 | 应用心理学 |
| 其他题名 | The cognitive nrocessing mechanism of directed forgetting |
| 中文摘要 | Unlike passive forgetting, which has been negatively labeled as "memory failure", active forgetting refers to an individual's ability to selectively forget unwanted memories. It can help individuals forget irrelevant or distracting information, thus saving cognitive resources and improving cognitive efficiency. It can also help individuals actively forget painful or unpleasant experiences, thus promoting psychologically healthy development. However, active forgetting is not an easy task, and some studies have questioned the validity of item-based directed forgetting cues. However, there are relatively few studies on the validity of directed forgetting, and the cognitive mechanisms of directed forgetting are still unclear. Thus, the present study used the item-method directed forgetting paradigm to examine the cognitive mechanism of directed forgetting by comparing directed forgetting and natural forgetting, and further exploring the methods of intervening directed forgetting and natural forgetting. Study 1 explored the effectiveness of directed forgetting and its cognitive mechanism. Experiment 1 and Experiment 2 set two types of natural forgetting cues as control conditions: One was To-be-ignored (referred to as TBI) condition with informative cues and instructions (Experiment 1), and the other was No cue (referred to as NC) condition without cues and instructions (Experiment 2). By comparing the hit rate of to-be-remembered (TBR), to-be-forgotten (TBF) and the natural forgetting conditions (TBI or NC), it was found that the hit rate of TBF and the natural forgetting conditions was significantly lower than that of TBR conditions, but there was no significant difference between TBF and TBI (or NC), which indicated that the directed forgetting and natural forgetting had similar forgetting effects. Experiment 3 mainly verified whether there was cue-induced automatic activation by comparing TBF, TBI conditions with cue-free blank screen conditions (NC). The results showed that cues did not trigger automatic activation. TBF and TBI conditions with cues did not have better memory performance than NC conditions without cues. Therefore, Experiment 3 did not support the automatic activation hypothesis. Experiment 4 combined directed forgetting cues and natural forgetting cues with post-cue probe task to test the influence of different cues on the following probe task in order to distinguish the active suppression and passive decay mechanism of TBF. The results showed that the probe task response time following TBF and TBI cue was significantly slower than TBR cue, suggesting that directed forgetting (and natural forgetting) may be related to active inhibitory processing. Experiment 5 further examined the inhibition failure hypothesis of directed forgetting by setting distraction task conditions and no distraction task conditions. It mainly examines how cognitive load affects directed forgetting and natural forgetting. The results showed that compared with the no-distraction condition, the TBF under the distraction condition was more identified as the old item, that is, the TBF rebound phenomenon occurred. This is consistent with the expectation of the inhibition failure hypothesis, that is, the distraction task will interfere with the inhibition process of directed forgetting items, resulting in inhibition failure and even a rebound effect of TBF. However, the natural forgetting was not affected by distraction tasks, which showed that directed forgetting and natural forgetting had different sensitivity to cognitive resources, and directed forgetting was more susceptible to cognitive load. Study 2 explored the effect of directed forgetting on gist information (abstract meaning) and verbatim representation by combining directed forgetting paradigm with DRM words and Non-DRM words. In order to solve the limitation of the few key lures in previous studies, Experiment 6a first screened semantically high related words to increase the candidate words of critical lures that can induce false memory. Experiment 6b verified that the selected semantically high related words did have the similar effect to critical lures. Experiment 7 required participants to learn DRM and Non-DRM list words, and provided instruction cues for participants to remember or forget. The DRM list words (with both verbatim and gist representation) were compared with Non-DRM list words (with only verbatim representation but no gist representation) and critical lures (with only gist representation) to test the effect of directed forgetting cues on verbatim representation and gist information. The study found that directed forgetting cues have a stable inhibitory effect on verbatim representation and gist information. Experiment 8 further compared the effects of directed forgetting and natural forgetting on verbatim representation and gist information. It was found that directed forgetting and natural forgetting cues had similar inhibitory effects on verbatim representation and gist information. Study 3 preliminarily explored the effect of multi-stage training on directed forgetting and natural forgetting. This study mainly adopted the method of two-day multi-stage training. Experiment 9 examined whether there would be a rebound effect of TBF by enhancing the participants' monitoring awareness of TBF during the training phase. The study found that after two rounds of training, the memory performance of directed forgetting condition in the final testing stage was significantly higher than that of natural forgetting condition, that is, enhancing the awareness of TBF monitoring will lead to the rebound effect of TBF. Experiment 10a and l Ob mainly aimed to change the processing strategy of natural forgetting condition by increasing the test probability of natural forgetting cue in the training stage, which led to the subjects mainly adopting the memory strategy for natural forgetting conditions. Thus, the study found that the memory performance of natural forgetting conditions in the formal test stage was significantly higher than that of directed forgetting conditions. Experiment lOc further investigated whether increasing the test probability of directed forgetting and natural forgetting conditions (both 50%) during the training phase can affect the individual's processing strategies for TBF and TBI. The study found that TBF and TBI not only had no significant difference in hit rate, but also increased the number of people who adopted memory strategies for both cues. The hit rates of TBF and TBI using memory strategies were significantly higher than those using other strategies. In short, the multi-stage training method can change the processing methods and processing strategies of directed forgetting and natural forgetting. In summary, this study first tested the difference between directed forgetting andnatural forgetting, and investigated the cognitive mechanism of directed forgetting and natural forgetting, which theoretically expanded the cognitive mechanism of directed forgetting and natural forgetting. In addition, this study also innovatively proposed a multi-stage training method for intervention directed forgetting and natural forgetting processing strategies, which has both theoretical and application importance. On the whole, this study draws the following conclusions: (1) Directed forgetting and natural forgetting have similar forgetting effects; (2) Compared with natural forgetting, directed forgetting cues are not automatically activated; (3) Both directed forgetting and natural forgetting are active inhibition process, but directed forgetting is more susceptible to the interference of cognitive load; (4) Directed forgetting and natural forgetting have similar inhibitory effects on verbatim representation and gist information; (5) Multi-stage training can effectively intervene the processing strategies of directed forgetting and natural forgetting. |
| 英文摘要 | 遗忘曾被贴上“记忆失败”的负性标签，但与这种被动的遗忘不同，主动遗忘是指个体对不想要的记忆进行选择性遗忘的能力。它可以帮助个体遗忘一些无关或干扰的信息从而节省认知资源、提高认知效率，也可以帮助个体主动忘记一些痛苦的或者不愉快的经历以促进心理健康发展。项目法定向遗忘是研究主动遗忘的经典范式之一，但主动遗忘也并非易事。有研究曾对项目法定向遗忘线索的有效性提出了质疑，但现有关于定向遗忘有效性的研究还比较少，而且关于定向遗忘的认知加工机制仍不清楚。本研究采用项目法定向遗忘范式，通过对比定向遗忘和自然遗忘，来考察定向遗忘的认知机制，并对干预定向遗忘的方法进行了初步探索。 研究一探究了定向遗忘的有效性及其认知机制。实验1和实验2设置了两种自然遗忘线索作为对照条件:实验1采用有线索有指令要求(To-be-ignored，简称TBI的对照条件，实验2采用无线索无指令要求(No cue，简称NC)的对照条件。通过比较定向记忆、定向遗忘和自然遗忘条件下测试项目的击中率，研究发现定向遗忘和自然遗忘条件的击中率都显著小于定向记忆条件，但定向遗忘和自然遗忘条件没有显著差异，这表明定向遗忘和自然遗忘有类似的遗忘效果。实验3通过将有线索提示的定向遗忘条件(TBF)、有线索提示的自然遗忘条件 (TBI)和无线索提示的自然遗忘条件(NC)进行比较来检验定向遗忘是否存在线索诱发的自动激活。研究发现线索并未触发自动激活，有线索提示的TBF和TBI条件并没有比无线索提示的NC条件有更高的记忆成绩，因此不支持自动激活假设。实验4主要解决定向遗忘与抑制的关系，通过在学习阶段将线索与不同SOA条件下的线索后探测任务结合，研究发现相比于定向记忆线索，定向遗忘和自然遗忘线索后的探测任务反应时间显著变慢，这表明定向遗忘和自然遗忘都与抑制有关。实验5进一步检验定向遗忘与抑制失败的关系，主要通过给线索设置分心任务来考察认知负荷条件对定向遗忘和自然遗忘的影响。研究发现相比于无分心任务条件，分心任务条件下定向遗忘项目(TBF)会更多地被再认为旧项目，即出现了定向遗忘项目的记忆反弹现象，而自然遗忘条件则不受分心任务的影响，这表明定向遗忘和自然遗忘对认知资源的敏感性不同，定向遗忘更容易受到认知负荷的影响。 研究二通过将定向遗忘与DRM关联词和非DRM词(Non-DRM)结合探究了定向遗忘对主旨信息(抽象意义)和字词表征的作用。为解决以往研究中关键诱词数量少的局限，实验6a首先筛选了语义强相关词汇，以增加关键诱词的备选词汇。实验6b验证了筛选出的语义强相关词具有类似关键诱词的错误记忆诱发效果。实验7同时设置了DRM和Non-DRM列表词汇并结合定向记忆和定向遗忘线索，将DRM列表词汇(同时有字词和主旨表征)分别与Non-DRM列表词汇(只有字词表征而没有主旨信息)以及关键诱词(只有主旨信息)进行对比，结果发现定向遗忘线索对于字词表征和主旨信息都具有抑制作用。实验8在实验7的基础上增加了自然遗忘线索，进一步发现定向遗忘和自然遗忘线索对字词表征和主旨信息都有抑制作用。 研究三初步探索了多阶段训练方式对定向遗忘和自然遗忘的作用。本研究主要采取两天多阶段训练的方式，实验9在训练阶段通过增强被试对定向遗忘项目的监测意识来考察是否会出现定向遗忘项目(TBF)的反弹情况。主要通过两种方式增强TBF项目的监测意识:一是，在训练阶段通过指导语引起被试对TBF项目的记忆抑制加工;二是，在训练阶段，将TBF项目的测试概率设置为0，并增强被试对TBF项目的有意识监测。研究发现，经过两轮的训练后，定向遗忘在正式阶段的记忆成绩显著高于自然遗忘条件，即增强对TBF项目的监测意识会出现TBF项目的反弹现象。实验10a和lOb主要通过提高训练阶段自然遗忘条件的测试概率来改变被试在自然遗忘线索条件下的加工策略，导致被试对自然遗忘条件主要采取记忆的策略，因此发现，正式测验阶段自然遗忘条件的记忆成绩显著高于定向遗忘条件。实验lOc进一步考察在训练阶段同时提高定向遗忘 (TBF)和自然遗忘(TBI )条件的测试概率(均为50%)是否可以同时影响个体对TBF和TBI的加工策略，研究发现，TBF和TBI不仅在击中率上没有显著差异，且对两种线索采取记忆策略的人数增加，采用记忆策略的被试TBF和TBI的击中率都显著高于采用其他策略的被试。综上，多阶段训练方式可以使得定向遗忘和自然遗忘的加工方式和加工策略发生改变。 综上，本研究首先对定向遗忘和自然遗忘的差异进行了检验，并对定向遗忘的认知机制进行了考察，这在理论上拓展了定向遗忘的认知机理。此外，本研究还创新性地提出了干预定向遗忘和自然遗忘加工方式和加工策略的多阶段训练方式，兼具理论和应用价值。综合来看，本研究得出以下结论:C1)定向遗忘和自然遗忘有类似的遗忘效果;C2)相比于自然遗忘，定向遗忘线索没有自动激活; (3)定向遗忘和自然遗忘都与主动的抑制加工过程有关，但定向遗忘更容易受到认知负荷的干扰;(4)定向遗忘和自然遗忘对字词表征和主旨信息有相似的抑制作用;(5)多阶段训练方式可以影响定向遗忘和自然遗忘的加工方式和加工策略。 |
| 语种 | 中文 |
| 源URL | [http://ir.psych.ac.cn/handle/311026/46159]  |
| 专题 | 心理研究所_社会与工程心理学研究室 |
| 推荐引用方式 GB/T 7714 | 滑慧敏. 定向遗忘的认知加工机制研究[D]. 中国科学院心理研究所. 中国科学院大学. 2023. |
入库方式： OAI收割
来源：心理研究所
浏览0
下载0
收藏0
其他版本
除非特别说明，本系统中所有内容都受版权保护，并保留所有权利。