바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

ACOMS+ 및 학술지 리포지터리 설명회

  • 한국과학기술정보연구원(KISTI) 서울분원 대회의실(별관 3층)
  • 2024년 07월 03일(수) 13:30
 

logo

인지적 통제 능력의 개인차와 선택적 주의: 대상효과와 위치효과를 중심으로

Individual differences in cognitive control and selective attention: object-based attention and location-based attention

한국심리학회지: 인지 및 생물 / The Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology, (P)1226-9654; (E)2733-466X
2016, v.28 no.2, pp.309-326
https://doi.org/10.22172/cogbio.2016.28.2.006
권미경 (Department of Neuroscience Univ. of California, Sa)
김민식 (연세대학교)
  • 다운로드 수
  • 조회수

초록

개인의 인지적 특성과 선택적 주의의 관계를 이해하는 것은 기본적인 인지처리 과정의 이해뿐만 아니라 병리학적으로도 의의가 있다. Bleckley 등(2003, 2015)은 인지적 통제능력이 높은 사람은 효율적 선택을 위해 대상을 중심으로 주의를 할당하는 반면(대상에 근거한 촉진 효과), 인지적 통제능력이 낮은 사람은 위치를 중심으로 넓게 주의를 할당한다고 주장하였다. 만약, 인지적 통제능력이 높은 사람에게서 관찰되는 대상에 근거한 촉진효과가 개인의 고정된 주의할당 방식이 아니라 효율성의 산물이라면, 대상에 근거한 선택이 효율적이지 않을 경우 촉진효과가 사라져야 할 것이다. 본 연구는 움직이는 대상 패러다임을 사용하여 위치효과와 대상효과를 보다 정확히 측정하였으며, 대상에 기반한 선택이 효율적이지 않은 상황에서 인지적 통제능력의 상위집단과 하위집단 간에 주의할당 방식의 차이가 나타나는 지를 살펴보았다. 실험 결과, 단서가 주어진 ‘위치’에 목표자극이 제시될 확률이 높다는 사전 정보를 주었을 때, 상위집단은, 하위집단과 달리, (위치와 분리된) 대상으로의 주의 할당을 억제하는 경향을 보였다. 반면에, 집단 간 (대상과 분리된) 위치효과의 차이는 유의하지 않았다. 이러한 결과는 대상효과가 개인의 인지적 통제능력과 관련이 있다는 기존의 이론을 지지할 뿐만 아니라 대상효과의 방향이 과제에 따라 유동적임을 시사한다.

keywords
인지적 통제, 대상효과, 위치효과, 주의, cognitive control, object effect, location effect, attention

Abstract

Understanding the relationship between individuals’ cognitive abilities and selective attention has implications for both general cognitive mechanisms and characteristics of special populations. Bleckley et al. (2003, 2015) suggested that individuals with high cognitive control ability allocate attention effectively based on an object (i.e., object-based facilitation effect), whereas individuals with low cognitive control ability allocate attention broadly based on the location of the object. If those with high cognitive control ability use object-based attention for effective information processing, they should not allocate attention to an object, if selection based on the object is not effective. The present study examined how individuals with high cognitive ability and with low cognitive ability allocate their attention when the selection based on an object is not effective. We also attempted to measure location and object effects more accurately by moving a cued object to another location. The results revealed that when participants were informed that a target was more likely to occur at the cued location, only those with high cognitive ability showed an inhibition effect at the opposite end of the cued object (separated from its original location). In contrast, the magnitude of location effect (separated from the object) did not differ between the high and low control groups. Our findings not only support the view that object effect is related with cognitive control but also suggest that the direction of object effect varies across tasks.

keywords
인지적 통제, 대상효과, 위치효과, 주의, cognitive control, object effect, location effect, attention

참고문헌

1.

강해인, 현주석 (2011). 시각작업기억 처리 단계에 따른 주의 자원 활용 특성. 한국심리학회지: 인지 및 생물, 23, 487-504.

2.

권미경, 김민식 (2002). 움직이는 대상에서의주의의 대상 효과와 군집화 효과. 한국심리학회지: 인지 및 생물, 14, 345-358.

3.

민수정, 김민식, 이도준, 김가민 (2013). 작업기억 부하에 의한 방추상 얼굴영역의 방해자극 관련 정보처리의 감소. 한국심리학회지: 인지 및 생물, 25, 1-24.

4.

민윤기, 김보성, 정종욱 (2008). 대상- 및 공간-기반 주의가 작업기억에 미치는 영향. 인지과학, 19, 125-142.

5.

이현규, 김민식 (2009). 자극 친숙성이 작업기억에 의한 주의 유도에 미치는 영향. 한국심리학회지: 인지 및 생물, 21, 129-145.

6.

Awh, E., Jonides, J., & Reuter-Lorenz. (1998). Rehearsal in spatial working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 780–790.

7.

Baddeley, A. (2003). Working memory: Looking back and looking forward. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 2003(4), 829–839.

8.

Bengson, J. J., & Mangun, G. R. (2011). Individual working memory capacity is uniquely correlated with feature-based attention when combined with spatial attention. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 73, 86–102.

9.

Bleckley, M. K., Durso, F. T., Crutchfield, J. M., Engle, & Khanna, M. M. (2003). Individual differences in working memory capacity predict visual attention allocation. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 884–889.

10.

Bleckley, M. K., Foster, J. L., & Engle, R. W. (2015). Working memory capacity accounts for the ability to switch between object-based and location-based allocation of visual attention. Memory & Cognition, 43, 379–388.

11.

Castel, A. D., Pratt, J., & Craik, F. I. M. (2003). The role of spatial working memory in inhibition of return: Evidence from divided attention tasks. Perception & Psychophysics, 65, 970–981.

12.

Chou, W. L., & Yeh, S. L. (2008). Location- and object-based inhibition of return are affected by different kinds of working memory. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61, 1761–1768.

13.

Chou, W. L., Yeh, S. L., & Chen, C. C. (2014). Distinct mechanisms subserve location- and object-based visual attention. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 1–8.

14.

Conway, A. R. A., Cowan, N., & Bunting, M. F. (2001). The cocktail party phenomenon revisited: The importance of working memory capacity. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 331–335.

15.

de-Wit, L. H., Kentridge, R. W., & Milner, A. D. (2009). Object-based attention and visual area LO. Neuropsychologia, 47, 1483–1490.

16.

Duncan, J. (1984). Selective attention and the organization of visual information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 113, 501-517.

17.

Egly, R., Driver, J., & Rafal, R. D. (1994). Shifting visual attention between objects and locations: Evidence from normal and parietal lesion subjects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 123, 161-177.

18.

Egly, R., & Homa, D. (1984). Sensitization of the visual field. Journal of Experimental Psychology:Human Perception and Performance, 10, 778–793.

19.

Eriksen., C. W., & St James., J. D. (1986). Visual attention within and around the field of focal attention; A zoom lens model. Perception &Psychophysics, 40, 225-240.

20.

Kane, M. J., Bleckley, M. K., Conway, A. R., & Engle, R. W. (2001). A controlled-attention view of working-memory capacity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130, 169–183.

21.

List, A., & Robertson, L. C. (2007). Inhibition of return and object-based attentional selection. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 33, 1322–1334.

22.

McCrae, C. S., & Abrams, R. A. (2001). Age-related differences in object-and location-based inhibition of return of attention. Psychology & Aging, 16, 437–449.

23.

Pilz, K. S., Roggeveen, A. B., Creighton, S. E., Bennett, P. J., & Sekuler, A. B. (2012). How prevalent is object-based attention? PLoS ONE, 7(2): e30693. http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0030693

24.

Possin, K. L., Filoteo, J. V., Song, D. D., & Salmon, D. P. (2009). Space-based but not object-based inhibition of return is impaired in Parkinson’s disease. Neuropsychologia, 47, 1694–1700.

25.

Reppa, I., & Schmidt, W. C., & Leek, E. C. (2012). Successes and failures in producing attentional object-based cueing effects. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 74, 43–69.

26.

Smid, H. G. O. M., Bruggeman, R., & Martens, S. (2013). Fragmented perception: Slower space-based but faster object-based attention in recent-onset psychosis with and without schizophrenia. PLoS ONE, 8(3): e59983. http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0059983

27.

Smid, H. G. O. M., Martens, S., de Witte, M. R., & Bruggeman, R. (2013). Inflexible minds:Impaired attention switching in recent-onset schizophrenia. PLoS ONE, 8(10): e78062. http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0078062

28.

Smyth, M. M. (1996). Interference with rehearsal in spatial working memory in the absence of eye movements. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 49, 940–949.

29.

Tassinari, G., Aglioti, S., Chelazzi, L., Peru, A., & Berlucchi, G. (1994). Do peripheral non-informative cues induce early facilitation of target detection? Vision Research, 34, 179–189.

30.

Tipper, S. P., Jereat, L. M., & Burak, A. L. (1994). Object-based and environment-based inhibition of return visual attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20, 479-299.

31.

Turner, M., & Engle, R. (1989). Is working memory task dependent? Journal of Memory and Language, 28, 127–154.

32.

Vecera, S. P., & Farah, M. J. (1994). Does visual attention select objects or locations? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 123, 146–160.

한국심리학회지: 인지 및 생물