CAJ | 학술논문

探讨在RSVP任务中重复刺激的呈现位置和报告方式对重复知盲效应的影响，检验该研究提出的注意资源最优化假设和末位优势效应。实验1操作了刺激性质和重复刺激位置，得出了刺激性质和重复刺激位置的交互效应；实验2操作了刺激性质和情景信息，结果是交互效应不显著；实验3操作了刺激性质和报告方式，出现了刺激性质和报告方式的交互效应。该结果表明：（1）由于注意资源分配的优化，重复刺激有末位优势效应。（2）重复知盲的产生不是发生在知觉阶段，而是发生在报告阶段。（3）注意资源分配最优化理论比建构／归因理论能更合理地解释重复知盲的发生。
탐토재RSVP임무중중복자격적정현위치화보고방식대중복지맹효응적영향，검험해연구제출적주의자원최우화가설화말위우세효응。실험1조작료자격성질화중복자격위치，득출료자격성질화중복자격위치적교호효응；실험2조작료자격성질화정경신식，결과시교호효응불현저；실험3조작료자격성질화보고방식，출현료자격성질화보고방식적교호효응。해결과표명：（1）유우주의자원분배적우화，중복자격유말위우세효응。（2）중복지맹적산생불시발생재지각계단，이시발생재보고계단。（3）주의자원분배최우화이론비건구／귀인이론능경합리지해석중복지맹적발생。
People are adept at identifying short lists of consecutively presented items in a rapid serial visual presentation （RSVP） paradigm. However, they often fail to detect repetitions of items （C 1 and C2） when they are separated by one intervening item. This phenomenon is called repetition blindness （RB; Kanwisher, 1987）. In the literature, there were mainly two views explaining why and how RB occurred, namely, ＂activation/inhibition＂ view and ＂construction/attribution＂ view （Morris, Still, ＆ Caldwell-Harris, 2009）. Neither view could explain the results from studies supporting the other view. Thus, the present study proposed an Optimization Allocation of Attention Resources Hypothesis. People can allocate attention resources according to the task to get the best recall performance. In a RSVP paradigm with repeated items, people may sacrifice deep processing of repeated items to detect non-repeated items, so RB may be caused by little attention paid to repeated items. According to the hypothesis, RB on the item repeated at the last position in RSVP would decrease because people allocated more attention to the item at the last position than to the item in the middle; no matter the context of the repeated item changed or not, RB would keep constant because people always allocate more attention to non-repeated items than to the repeated item; in a backward recall task, RB would reduce because people allocate more attention to C2 （presented later than C 1） to get better recall. The present study conducted three experiments with the RSVP paradigm to verify the Optimization Allocation of Attention Resources Hypothesis for RB. In all three experiments, the researchers used a within-subject design with two variables, manipulating Repetition （repeated and non-repeated） throughout the study and changing the other variable. Experiment 1 manipulated Position （middle and last） to investigate how the presenting position affected RB. Experiment 2 manipulated Context （changed and not-changed） to investigate how the context affected RB. Experiment 3 manipulated Task （forward recall and backward recall） to investigate how the recall task affected RB. The accuracy rates for reporting C2 in the RSVP paradigm were compared using a two-way repeated-measures analysis of variance for each experiment. In Experiment 1, the results showed a Last Position Superiority Effect of repetition stimulus that the accuracy rate for reporting C2 at middle position was lower than that at last position in both repeated and non-repeated conditions. In Experiment 2, the interaction of Repetition and Context was not significant. And in Experiment 3, the difference of the accuracy rate for reporting C2 between the repeated condition and the non-repeated condition was not significant in the backward report. Therefore, the results in the three experiments all supported the Optimization Allocation of Attention Resources Hypothesis. Further, the present study indicated that： 1. The last position superiority had effect on repetition stimulus because of the optimization allocation of attention resources; 2. RB occurred at the report phase, not at the perception phase; 3. The optimization allocation of attention resources hypothesis was better than the construction and attribution theory for explaining the RB.